|
8 months ago ::
Oct 11, 2012 - 2:05AM
#21
|
Date Joined:
Apr 28, 2009
|
I, also, think it may be too late for me not to feel alienated by WOTC.
They seem obsessed with gauging fan reaction on the "feel" of every little detail of the next edition, rather than being intent on designing a game system with a clear vision, and rather than supporting a previous edition when it will differ greatly from the new one.
Worse, they ask questions that seem to be more like "is this monster/spell list familiar to you," rather than "do you LIKE it." Those are two very different things, IMO. We likely already own, and may be playing, one or more versions of D&D that are familiar to us. I, personally, have to like the Next edition enough to want to buy it.
But even if they were concerned about a different level of fan reaction, they are still TOO concerned with it. If WOTC wants to design a game that is like some previous versions of D&D in specific ways, or is different in specific ways from previous versions, they need to just go ahead and do it.
On the other hand, I don't think WOTC should cut off all support for a current edition in hopes of "forcing" you to buy the next one. If the previous version of D&D will be so different from the next one, continue to support both, while of course giving the newer version a little push upon release. Cutting off support for an edition drives fans to find a product that is similar to the abandoned version of D&D they prefer (see Pathfinder, possibly 13th Age).
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 11, 2012 - 3:45AM
#22
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
Finish 4e. --- Sorry Alienate not the right word... that avoids Disappointing me. I am not alienated.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 11, 2012 - 4:34AM
#23
|
Date Joined:
Jan 28, 2010
|
#4 Poor quality products:
I want them to hire either increase the budget for the print-runs OR hire a new production manager so they make quality books again.
Most 4E books had wavy paper when it arrived. Poor!
Also stop printing on short grain paper... print on long grain! (so each page flips over easily without the crack noise)
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 11, 2012 - 4:35AM
#24
|
Date Joined:
Jan 28, 2010
|
(in case you don't know what I'm talking about: www.xerox.com/printer-supplies/paper-sto...) Book BindingWhen you are binding a book, always make sure the paper grain of every page is parallel to the binding edge of the book. Do not mix grain directions in book pages. Why? You could encounter any or all of these problems:
- Pages resist turning
- Paper edges are wavy
- Binding edge is bulky and distorted
- Pages flare outward
- Book snaps closed when you try to open it
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 11, 2012 - 4:36AM
#25
|
|
|
- Putting out a edition which requires me to hunt down 20 year old books to make any sense of the monsters.
- Putting out a edition which pretends literature and other parts of the culture froze in the 80's.
- Putting out a edition for which the main interface towards the public is a column dedicated to "how good things were back in the ol' days".
- Focusing so much on their new edtion that they won't even throw a bone to their current paying customers who are still playing their current edition.
Kind of too late for those last two 
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 11, 2012 - 5:28AM
#26
|
|
|
For the most part I couldn't care less. As long as they're not morally bankrupt (enslaving workers, heavy pollution, etc), reasonably priced, and turn out a quality product that I want to play I'm sold. To mimic what Saelorn said, it has to be in the books, especially the core books, and not online. There is no digital at our tables.
My reponse is the exact opposite of this. I feel that WotC has been agonizingly slow to embrace the digital age. My group was using computers in table top D&D since the AD&D 1e Dungeon Master Tools came out in the 80's. We heavily used the AD&D 2e Core Rules product and eTools was just one of many computer tools we used (along with the addition of a DM laptop starting with 3e. Paizo has already proven that people want digital publication of products, and has even innovated further by providing interactive digital PDF maps with their Adventure Path products and by allowing downloads of updated PDFs when the books are revised. This is the best of all solutions because it means they don't have to reiterate updated rules in new products that will annoy most digitally aware gamers, and gamers don't have to constantly repurchase reprints of core rule books (unless they want to...and you and Saelorn might fall into this category). Online and digital is the future of this game, not to mention the hobby. Maybe they haven't found the right presentation yet to make it less a distraction for you, but if they go all in that presentation is likely to come much more quickly than if they take your suggestion.
Kalex the Omen Dungeonmaster Extraordinaire Concerning Player Rules Bias
Show
Gaining victory through rules bias is a hollow victory and they know it.
The argument goes, that some idiot at the table might claim that because there is a "default" that is the only true way to play D&D. An idiotic misconception that should be quite easy to disprove just by reading the rules, coming to these forums, or sending a quick note off to Customer Support and sharing the inevitable response with the group. BTW, I'm not just talking about Next when I say this. Of course, D&D has always been this way since at least the late 70's when I began playing.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 11, 2012 - 6:33AM
#27
|
Date Joined:
Nov 19, 2007
|
I'm not alienated, but disappointed by the lack of computer-based support material like the 2nd Ed Core Rules and the expansion. I use that extensively for my campaign even now. I don't think I'd want to plan a session without it. It covers PCs, NPCS, monsters, items (magic and not), maps, encounters, and includes an extensive library (most of which I have in hard copy, but it's handy to have them right there for reference). Not making that for anything past 2nd Ed is a business decision that lost them a lot of revenue.
Make that for 5e and I'll be all over it!
In memory of wrecan and his Unearthed Wrecana.5e should strongly stay away from "I don't like it, so you can't have it either."
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 11, 2012 - 6:36AM
#28
|
Date Joined:
Feb 19, 2009
|
None of the books have been delivered to my house on release day by Felicia Day riding a Unicorn.
Of COURSE that alienates me, as it would any reasonable player.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 11, 2012 - 8:32AM
#29
|
Date Joined:
Apr 23, 2009
|
1. If the game is full of plot couponish mechanics that are hard to avoid.
2. If traditional playstyles are ignored. If it doesn't feel like D&D basically.
3. The devs talking down to me and saying they know best what is fun.
4. The classes need to play differently.
5. Non-Wuxia martial options available upon release.
Basically I'm open to anything in the game. But the game can't be missing important things. So it's more of -- I want X included. I don't mind ignoring stuff I don't like.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 11, 2012 - 9:04AM
#30
|
Date Joined:
Aug 10, 2012
|
I can honestly say that after looking at the interviews from gen con I think they get it. I think they saw where they made the mistakes. 4th was one of those mistakes. Not that the edition was bad (you may think it was or was not) but that the edition decided on what style of play was DnD. No other edition did that as heavy handed as 4th. Third was also quite a bit heavy handed with its design. Both were based in which way you should play and what default play should be for the game. That is the biggest mistake that they could make. Rules and mechanics aside when you design the game with a single play style you by default alienate a large portion of the group.
that was my biggest issue aside from mechanics and other topics dealing with edition war type problems which I will leave out of this thread.
|
|
|
