We all know in the past that some D&D fans were alienated by the business practices of WotC. Here I want to compile a list of the things WotC did in the past that they should avoid with 5E to avoid alienating you from playing 5E. Now this isn't meant to be a list of game mechanics or fluff descriptions that they should avoid. This is meant to list the things they did as a business that turned people away from previous editions of the game.
Please no long discussions or refutations. What did they do to you personally that alienated you from them in the past. Remember this is a personal look at what people felt alienated themselves not you from D&D or WotC as a company. Lets keep them numbered so I'll start with:
#1 No communication on the forums from the developers
#2 "Changing direction" constantly
#3 Saying one thing and doing another
#4 Poor quality products
#5 Constant Errata.
#6 Not listening to feedback.
We all know in the past that some D&D fans were alienated by the business practices of WotC. Here I want to compile a list of the things WotC did in the past that they should avoid with 5E to avoid alienating you from playing 5E. Now this isn't meant
I want to know THE WHY for the decisions, and by THE WHY i mean beside because nostalgia or that it was like that before...I want 5e to be a new improved experience, not an old one outdated. I want to know what they are really adding new to the game...give me new things, not old things! Hell, expertice dice is held back by oldschool crap design...
I want to know THE WHY for the decisions, and by THE WHY i mean beside because nostalgia or that it was like that before...I want 5e to be a new improved experience, not an old one outdated. I want to know what they are really adding new to the game
Mixing in with #5 above, I felt alienated when they were constantly updating errata online instead of putting the important stuff into the real books.
When I'm at the game table, the books are right here. The internet is one huge distraction that I do not need.
Mixing in with #5 above, I felt alienated when they were constantly updating errata online instead of putting the important stuff into the real books.When I'm at the game table, the books are right here. The internet is one huge distraction that I d
How they alienate my patronage? Make an edition that made useless my previous rule books and the previous fluff and tell me that what I liked about D&D was stupid.
My group didn't switch from 2e to 3e when it was released. The first 3e book we got was a Forgotten Realms book, for the fluff. We discovered the rules in the book and went to try it. With 4e's break from the previous fluff, we didn't even had a reason to buy books.
How they alienate my patronage? Make an edition that made useless my previous rule books and the previous fluff and tell me that what I liked about D&D was stupid. My group didn't switch from 2e to 3e when it was released. The first 3e book we got wa
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.
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
I think above all else this was the single most alienating aspect of WOTC's history and since 2008 this community is completetly foreign to me. Most of the old school players from 3rd edition have completetly abandoned the forums and they have been replaced with a generation of gamers I have absolutly nothing in common with.
You mentioned "not listening to feedback", I have to disagree there. I think they have been quite good about it, its the one thing that I noted. Sure they are a bit slow in their reaction but it appears to me that at least in the last year they have come to reckgonize some of their mistakes and they are trying to correct them. Things like reprinting classic books for fans that have been demanding it for like ever. Reckognizing that 1st, 2nd and 3rd edition fans are no less important than 4th edition fans (as implied by design goals in 5th edition) and above all reckognizing that D&D can't be a miniatures combat game as pointed out in Mike Mearls interview at Gencon. These where huge steps that could only have resulted in WOTC listening to their fans because these messages have been screamed at them for the past 4 years by players.
I think above all else this was the single most alienating aspect of WOTC's history and since 2008 this community is completetly foreign to me. Most of the old school players from 3rd edition have completetly abandoned the forums and they have been
I'd actually argue to lift the DDI subscription model completely and key it to book purchasing. I'd also like DDI to enable me to share content with members of my gaming group the way I can share a book.
That's actually the biggest issue with publishing a game like this for me. When I buy a new book, that means everyone in my gaming group has that book. It lets me spread the cost of the hobby around and it enables all of us to add on to the game in ways that interest us. This internet lockdown might be in the name of piracy but the result of the lockdown is I know a few people who want to give WOTC their money and use official resources but can't and instead have to resort to distributing pdfs to keep their gaming group in the loop. It only creates more piracy and it alienates the community.
An incarnation of the OGL would also be a huge incentive to adopt 5e.
I'd actually argue to lift the DDI subscription model completely and key it to book purchasing. I'd also like DDI to enable me to share content with members of my gaming group the way I can share a book.That's actually the biggest issue with publishi
The release of the traversty that is 4th edition was nothing short of a middile finger to 25+ years of D&D tradition, to the community and to role-playing itself. I think above all else this was the single most alienating aspect of WOTC's history and since 2008 this community is completetly foreign to me. Most of the old school players from 3rd edition have completetly abandoned the forums and they have been replaced with a generation of gamers I have absolutly nothing in common with.
You mentioned "not listening to feedback", I have to disagree there. I think they have been quite good about it, its the one thing that I noted. Sure they are a bit slow in their reaction but it appears to me that at least in the last year they have come to reckgonize some of their mistakes and they are trying to correct them. Things like reprinting classic books for fans that have been demanding it for like ever. Reckognizing that 1st, 2nd and 3rd edition fans are no less important than 4th edition fans (as implied by design goals in 5th edition) and above all reckognizing that D&D can't be a miniatures combat game as pointed out in Mike Mearls interview at Gencon. These where huge steps that could only have resulted in WOTC listening to their fans because these messages have been screamed at them for the past 4 years by players which have been filled with one cluster F*** after another.
This thread isn't about trying to refute everyone. Its about telling what WotC did to alienate YOU, not to argue about things.
For ME not listening to the fan base alienated me from WotC. For YOU it might have been listening to the fan base.
This thread isn't about trying to refute everyone. Its about telling what WotC did to alienate YOU, not to argue about things.For ME not listening to the fan base alienated me from WotC. For YOU it might have been listening to the fan base.
The release of the traversty that is 4th edition was nothing short of a middile finger to 25+ years of D&D tradition, to the community and to role-playing itself. I think above all else this was the single most alienating aspect of WOTC's history and since 2008 this community is completetly foreign to me. Most of the old school players from 3rd edition have completetly abandoned the forums and they have been replaced with a generation of gamers I have absolutly nothing in common with.
You mentioned "not listening to feedback", I have to disagree there. I think they have been quite good about it, its the one thing that I noted. Sure they are a bit slow in their reaction but it appears to me that at least in the last year they have come to reckgonize some of their mistakes and they are trying to correct them. Things like reprinting classic books for fans that have been demanding it for like ever. Reckognizing that 1st, 2nd and 3rd edition fans are no less important than 4th edition fans (as implied by design goals in 5th edition) and above all reckognizing that D&D can't be a miniatures combat game as pointed out in Mike Mearls interview at Gencon. These where huge steps that could only have resulted in WOTC listening to their fans because these messages have been screamed at them for the past 4 years by players which have been filled with one cluster F*** after another.
This thread isn't about trying to refute everyone. Its about telling what WotC did to alienate YOU, not to argue about things.
For ME not listening to the fan base alienated me from WotC. For YOU it might have been listening to the fan base.
Sorry, your right of course, my bad.
This thread isn't about trying to refute everyone. Its about telling what WotC did to alienate YOU, not to argue about things.For ME not listening to the fan base alienated me from WotC. For YOU it might have been listening to the fan base.[/quote]So
Actual game design, with a firm idea of intent, and what they're doing to build towards it. Show some understanding of numbers and economies of things like actions.
The best bits so far have been the art development columns, actually, those I've really enjoyed.
But really, the single best thing they could do is stop trying to please everyone, even if it means they stop making any pretense of trying to please *me*. Trying to please everyone, will wind up pleasing no-one, and losing them what little remains of their already-hideously-fractured audience, I'm quite certain of that. Compromise generally appeals to neither side, and when all the sides involved *already have a game they enjoy*, compromise will probably just lead them to not play this one.
Make decisions for themselves, rather than dumping all the design work onto DMs. If the entire game is basically telling me to make key design decisions about game balance myself, why on earth would I pay for the privilege?
Work much, MUCH more strongly with online presence. In a digital age, there's no excuse for your game to still contain obsolete elements the way 4e does, for instance, and there's no excuse for your digital tools not to be up-to-scratch and properly functional on ANY system the user wants to use. Put as much as possible into books, sure, and try to keep the printings up-to-date (maybe even think about a print-on-demand service past the intial launch, so later books can include errata), but recognise that you can have an up-to-date game, and many, many of your audience want you to. The D&D audience is composed almost entirely of geeks, mostly tech-savvy geeks, and it's infuriating when the tech side of things is as frankly pathetic as it was for 4e.
In short, try to look to the future, not to the past. Shame that's not going to happen, really.
Actual game design, with a firm idea of intent, and what they're doing to build towards it. Show some understanding of numbers and economies of things like actions. The best bits so far have been the art development columns, actually, those I've re
With little warning, and misleading packaging for that direction change. then rather than acknowledge that some people may not like the new direction and continuing to provide support for the older stuff, they say buy the new stuff or you get nothing. 4E and Essentials both had this problem.
#4 Poor quality products
#5 Constant Errata.
I bundle these together. With their utter lack of propper digital support (as tho that will cut down on file sharing, where's my eye roll gif...), releasing products that will have errata within a month is ridiculous. If they refuse to enter the digital age, they better make meticulous products. Especially at current dead tree prices.
Now, when entering the digital age, it's important not to kick all of the paper preferers to the corner.
In fact, they need to stop kicking swaths of their customers to the corner specifically to pander to others. Loyalty is not eroded, it is destroyed, when you are told your edition is wrong bad, and the people that hate it are the ones that we want as customers. This was done to 3X fans, now it is being done to 4E fans. I even hear it from my TSR fans who scoff at many of the conventions from 3X or the entirety of the WotC age.
In short, D&D isn't the only ship in their fleet, and it shows.
Oh, a venting thread, I have some steam to spill off.With little warning, and misleading packaging for that direction change. then rather than acknowledge that some people may not like the new direction and continuing to provide support for the older
To be honest I can't say that ever felt directly alienated. 4e didn't feel like a natural revision of the D&D I had played since 1e. 4e was a great system, but it left something behind. Something essentially D&D. I tried it out. The system was pretty neat! Lots of options! However...
I went and played a homebrew system instead that incoporated some castles and crusades/1e, some 3e, a couple 4e ideas, some call of cthulhu and simply went to town with that instead.
I guess you could say that the rule system just didn't do it for me or my groups and that alienated me. I've purchased $0 worth since my 4e core set. That isn't to say I haven't used the 4e core set. I have. But just barely. In other editions I could quote you page numbers for equipment lists. Many fluff and stat filled books for each fill a bookshelf. (To say that your fluff books were rendered useless by a new edition is a little broken to me.) One PHB is duct taped together and used regularly. That just didn't happen with 4e. With 3e I was heavily excited to see all my 2e house rules had made it to the game. I'm glad that Next looks like its taking some hints from my current homebrew system. It makes sense!
What does that mean? It means it feels more like a natural revision of the D&D system and not just a complete overhaul. It means that hopefully we'll also find some awesome stuff to throw into the system to make it more fun.
Alienated though? I'm not sure. I've never been extremely active in forums and the like so I can't claim I wasn't listened to. I'm changing that with this edition and it sounds like they are listening. So I'm excited about Next and eagerly eating up the new materials for playtests.
To be honest I can't say that ever felt directly alienated. 4e didn't feel like a natural revision of the D&D I had played since 1e. 4e was a great system, but it left something behind. Something essentially D&D. I tried it out. The system was pretty
We all know in the past that some D&D fans were alienated by the business practices of WotC. Here I want to compile a list of the things WotC did in the past that they should avoid with 5E to avoid alienating you from playing 5E. Now this isn't meant to be a list of game mechanics or fluff descriptions that they should avoid. This is meant to list the things they did as a business that turned people away from previous editions of the game.
Please no long discussions or refutations. What did they do to you personally that alienated you from them in the past. Remember this is a personal look at what people felt alienated themselves not you from D&D or WotC as a company. Lets keep them numbered so I'll start with:
#1 No communication on the forums from the developers
#2 "Changing direction" constantly
#3 Saying one thing and doing another
#4 Poor quality products
#5 Constant Errata.
#6 Not listening to feedback.
Well let's see first I would say that....no you covered that already...well there's the fact that...no you said that too....well I guess you got my thoughts covered entirely with your list. WotC's track record is absolutely horrible. By the way I don't call making a statement that they weren't working on 4e and then two weeks later announcing it at GenCon 'Changing Directions' I call that outright lying. I also call it outright lying when they state that there would be AEDU support coming down the pipeline after certain Essentials products were produced, and they never did (no a few powers in some Essentialized splatbooks don't count when there are at least 3 classes that needed far more support in the form of an XYZ Power book.) Also, isn't #3 the definition of lying or is that hypocrisy...? Either way, not good.
Only thing not on my list is the errata, though I do believe they could have handled it better. And yes communicating and even catering to their customers/fanbase, and by that I mean ALL their fans, not just the disenfranchised and disgruntled fans that hate 4e, would be a good move on their part and it's something they HAVE to do with all their competition this day and age. It would also help if they were transparent about their design goals. As of now (actually as of the first playtest packet) they have lost me and my group and a few others in my area. They completely bungled their first impression, and while many will say "But it was just a rough draft to try the basics of the game', I say then don't test that part, especially when you're going to do it publically.
Wait until you have enough that makes a good first impression. The playtest packet they just released should have been the first one, and yes that means the playtest wouldn't have started until just recently. I say that because it may have had more people interested and curious as to what they might do in the future. I couldn't even begin to ask my group to try the current playtest without them all looking at me like I had just grown a third eye that breathes acid and talks. Their first impression with the first packet was really that bad.
As a point of reference see any MMORPG produced ever. They wait until the beta stages to do any sort of open playtesting, and even then it's usually fairly late into the beta stages. They don't start inviting people during the Alpha phase, which I feel that first packet was.
Anyway at this point I don't think they can make it so that me, my group, and the others I know of in the area don't feel alienated. Too little too late. They had their chance at a first impression and they failed.
Well let's see first I would say that....no you covered that already...well there's the fact that...no you said that too....well I guess you got my thoughts covered entirely with your list. WotC's track record is absolutely horrible. By the way I don
I've removed content from this thread because edition warring and masked vulgarity are violations of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code of Conduct here www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_...
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
I've removed content from this thread because edition warring and masked vulgarity are violations of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code of Conduct here www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_...Please keep your posts polite, respectful, a
Specific business decisions the company made to alienate me were there decision to eliminate pdf sales due to concerns over piracy.
editted to bring back on topic Specific business decisions the company made to alienate me were there decision to eliminate pdf sales due to concerns over piracy.
If they create a balanced, coherent, elegant game where all archetypes can be used to create interesting and effective characters I will not be alienated.
If they create a unbalanced, fiddly, hodgepodge mess where only some archetypes are fully supported as "heroes" I will be alienated.
I want to steer this thread back on topic. Business wise what did WotC do to alienate you in the past. Please steer clear of game mechanics that rubbed you the wrong way. There are hundreds of thread for that.
I want to steer this thread back on topic. Business wise what did WotC do to alienate you in the past. Please steer clear of game mechanics that rubbed you the wrong way. There are hundreds of thread for that.
I'm not alienated by WotC, but I agree that pdf versions of the books is an excellent idea for 5e. I wish that Wizards could release pdf versions of the Saga books for at or near initial market price. Buying OOP books for 2 or 3 times initial cost or downloading illegal pdfs is just not my thing.
I'm not alienated by WotC, but I agree that pdf versions of the books is an excellent idea for 5e. I wish that Wizards could release pdf versions of the Saga books for at or near initial market price. Buying OOP books for 2 or 3 times initial cost or
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).
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, an
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)
#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...
When 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
(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 directio
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
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 inter
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.
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
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!
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
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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 editio
Provide some semblance of class parity, while still making characters and classes unique. In other words, I want a Martials and Magics game, not just Magics and Magics. In other words, I want my Wizards and Warriors game to have some emphasis on Warriors. In other words, I don't want my fighter to be a mechanical joke, thus making the game unfun if I choose to be said fighter.
Also, I'd like to see the PDF download option available, albeit at a price less than book form, to reflect the savings from printing, paper, and shipping. The conern for piracy has been completely overblown by most every company these days, and outright eliminating the digital option for 4e books only resulted in what people had been doing pre-4e for digital format, which is simply gutting physical books and scanning them in.
If DDI is to continue to exist, it should be worth the ticket price. Being the only material available for errata, and at a monthly fee is baffling. Purchasing an individual month is almost $10. I find it extraordinarily alienating to be charged money to get fixed content because of balance issues.
Maybe perhaps allows the PDF option available again, and have download codes for updated PDFs with errata material.
Not alienate me?Provide some semblance of class parity, while still making characters and classes unique. In other words, I want a Martials and Magics game, not just Magics and Magics. In other words, I want my Wizards and Warriors game to have som
Seems like a lot of people are unhappy with DDI. I never even bothered to look at it once I saw the fee. Is it really that bad? I mean, I'd not pay for it even if it wasn't but still.
Seems like a lot of people are unhappy with DDI. I never even bothered to look at it once I saw the fee. Is it really that bad? I mean, I'd not pay for it even if it wasn't but still.
The main problem with DDI is when they switched to the silverlight character builder and when they decided that dragon and dungeon magazine should have 1/4 of the content they used to have...this month dragon magazine have 34 pages....and half of them belong on dungeon magazine not dragon magazine, it's a very sad joke to call 34 pages a magazine you pay 10 bucks per month for...
The main problem with DDI is when they switched to the silverlight character builder and when they decided that dragon and dungeon magazine should have 1/4 of the content they used to have...this month dragon magazine have 34 pages....and half of the
Seems like a lot of people are unhappy with DDI. I never even bothered to look at it once I saw the fee. Is it really that bad? I mean, I'd not pay for it even if it wasn't but still.
It was good. It got worse. But do keep in mind that that monthly fee was, for many of us, a substitute to buying the published books, since you got all the crunchy stuff through your subscription.
It was good. It got worse. But do keep in mind that that monthly fee was, for many of us, a substitute to buying the published books, since you got all the crunchy stuff through your subscription.
Seems like a lot of people are unhappy with DDI. I never even bothered to look at it once I saw the fee. Is it really that bad? I mean, I'd not pay for it even if it wasn't but still.
It was awesome when you could buy a month, download it and then cancel your subscription. Totally worth the 12$ or whatever it was.
Once it became online only, the value dropped immensly.
I found the rules almost impossible to play without the builder, so I stopped. My players hated making characters for 4e by hand, and loved it for 3.X and 2nd ed. They said the builder made it reasonable and worth doing. Without it, they boycotted playing 4e games. With it, they didn't care either way. (I prefered 3.X, but was still giving 4e a try, hoping it would pan out)
Edit * Also it was advertised as costing about the price of a cup of coffee a month. Real price was not that.
It was awesome when you could buy a month, download it and then cancel your subscription. Totally worth the 12$ or whatever it was. Once it became online only, the value dropped immensly. I found the rules almost impossible to play without the builde
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.
I should have said 'not just online' in my post. I have no issue with them providing digital for those that want it, but it's not (and likely never will be) allowed at my tables. There are things we all do together with digital media...P&P rpgs aren't among them. However, I want the edition to be as successful as possible, and that means robust digital options.
I just don't want them so focused on it that the physical products suffer because of it. The game MUST be utterly and totally complete in physical books. What they do with digital after that is just icing (to me) for those that want it.
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
Most of the "alienation" for me came in the beginning. Quite a bit of it was fixed though.
Cost was a biggie! For the low book quality I was purchasing, the cost seemed absurd. Plus, PDFs (before they were taken down) were horribly overpriced.
The draconian measures of the GSL (even updated, it's not that great) was another thing that alienated me from the game. Now, I more often than not used my own creative concepts, but let's say someone (like that guy who made 3rd party Gamma World stuff) wants to make D&D fan products. They probably got the short end of the stick.
While I've loved the mechanics from the beginning, their approach to so-called core and fluff was what kept me away from 4th edition till my friends convinced me to give Essentials a try. (Now, before you accuse me of anything, I'm an active player in 4th, even DM'd 2 seasons at Encounters!) I won't deny, I loathe the approaches they took with the player races and especially hate how they handled campaign settings. The Forgotten Realms is a real big one there. But, to keep the bottle flames of hate from burning the thread, I'll leave it there. To be fair, I haven't picked up a current campaign book outside of crunch (I only got Neverwinter for monster stuff, themes, Bladesinger class, and cleric domains)
But, I digress. This is all my personal opinion (just popping that disclaimer there) and those are the reasons why I felt alienated for a couple years. Anyway, Wizards needs to analyze not just me, but others who have felt alienated and contemplate, "why?" If they can crack the code and provide for all, then 5E will surely be a success!
Most of the "alienation" for me came in the beginning. Quite a bit of it was fixed though.Cost was a biggie! For the low book quality I was purchasing, the cost seemed absurd. Plus, PDFs (before they were taken down) were horribly overpriced. The
The main problem with DDI is when they switched to the silverlight character builder and when they decided that dragon and dungeon magazine should have 1/4 of the content they used to have...this month dragon magazine have 34 pages....and half of them belong on dungeon magazine not dragon magazine, it's a very sad joke to call 34 pages a magazine you pay 10 bucks per month for...
I do not often agree with mexrage, but I do in this case.
WotC started alienating me when they destroyed the Dragon magazine.
I do not often agree with mexrage, but I do in this case.WotC started alienating me when they destroyed the Dragon magazine.
The main problem with DDI is when they switched to the silverlight character builder and when they decided that dragon and dungeon magazine should have 1/4 of the content they used to have...this month dragon magazine have 34 pages....and half of them belong on dungeon magazine not dragon magazine, it's a very sad joke to call 34 pages a magazine you pay 10 bucks per month for...
I do not often agree with mexrage, but I do in this case.
WotC started alienating me when they destroyed the Dragon magazine.
Yeah. Yanking the printing rights wasn't too cool either. If they had print and PDF, I'd be happy. Heck, I'd go for both! No matter, cutting down on content was even worse. Also, it's down to 34 now? Yikes!
I do not often agree with mexrage, but I do in this case.WotC started alienating me when they destroyed the Dragon magazine.[/quote]Yeah. Yanking the printing rights wasn't too cool either. If they had print and PDF, I'd be happy. Heck, I'd go for
The main problem with DDI is when they switched to the silverlight character builder and when they decided that dragon and dungeon magazine should have 1/4 of the content they used to have...this month dragon magazine have 34 pages....and half of them belong on dungeon magazine not dragon magazine, it's a very sad joke to call 34 pages a magazine you pay 10 bucks per month for...
I do not often agree with mexrage, but I do in this case.
WotC started alienating me when they destroyed the Dragon magazine.
Yeah. Yanking the printing rights wasn't too cool either. If they had print and PDF, I'd be happy. Heck, I'd go for both! No matter, cutting down on content was even worse. Also, it's down to 34 now? Yikes!
Word. The Dragon and Dungeon erosions are nigh on unforgiveable.
I do not often agree with mexrage, but I do in this case.WotC started alienating me when they destroyed the Dragon magazine.[/quote]Yeah. Yanking the printing rights wasn't too cool either. If they had print and PDF, I'd be happy. Heck, I'd go for
Prior to the announcement of 5e, the answer would have been "don't have a 5e until 2018 or so."
Despite my previous post, I have to say this +1.
Another far-removed second reason for not shifting to DDN is because I already shifted editions twice now, three times if you count 3.0 to 3.5 being an edition shift. With that all important first impression I mentioned above being as shoddy as it was, I am now fully prepared to fill out my 4e collection and ignore that DDN is even happening (with a few minor exceptions). If that first impression had really wowed me, well then I could see spending money on it when it comes out, but as it stands, no way. Even with the current iteration of the playtest packet, I wouldn't play it. More than likely I will borrow the main book from a friend, copy the pages that has stuff I like, and then incorporate it into my 4e game.
And I just had a thought - D&D needs to be handed off to another company. No. Really. WotC is edition change happy and this trend WILL continue if they hold on to the license. There WILL be a 6e, a 7e etc etc so on and so forth. Don't believe me, look at Magic. It occurs to me that they are treating D&D the same way.
Prior to the announcement of 5e, the answer would have been "don't have a 5e until 2018 or so." [/quote]Despite my previous post, I have to say this +1. Another far-removed second reason for not shifting to DDN is because I already shifted editions t
Prior to the announcement of 5e, the answer would have been "don't have a 5e until 2018 or so."
Another prime answer.
+1 from someone who wouldn't play 4e if it was a paid gig.
Prior to the announcement of 5e, the answer would have been "don't have a 5e until 2018 or so." [/quote]Another prime answer.+1 from someone who wouldn't play 4e if it was a paid gig.
5E needs to transcend the edition war. It needs to enable and support the playstyles of earlier editions, within reason(I don't think the OSR crowd can be pleased within reason), and including 4E. It must also not validate one or more playstyles over others.
I don't think it can be done, and the current playtest fails utterly at the above, but it's what they'll have to do if they insist on a single one-size-fits-all D&D.
To not alienate me(more than they already have):5E needs to transcend the edition war. It needs to enable and support the playstyles of earlier editions, within reason(I don't think the OSR crowd can be pleased within reason), and including 4E. It mu
Yeah, the key thing here is not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
They did that twice already, shifting from 2nd Ed to 3rd Ed and then again going from 3rd Ed to 4th Ed.
Each of those editions DID add good things to the game, and I think that it's important for 3rd and 4th Edition players to feel like the great material from their editions is being respected and included, but they certainly did burn a lot of bridges.
I too have shifted several times, and I will count 3rd Ed to 3.5 as it was world ending and character-reshaping for me and my campaign as well as those I was playing in, and don't want to see a loss of players again this time around.
For me, it's about seeing that the good things from 2nd, 3rd, 3.5 AND 4th Ed included in Next.
Though digital material, including a character builder (offline please, I don't always have broadband access down here in New Zealand) and PDFs of the books (White Wolf and Pathfinder both make profits while producing them WotC have no excuse not to) is also important.
Yeah, the key thing here is not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.They did that twice already, shifting from 2nd Ed to 3rd Ed and then again going from 3rd Ed to 4th Ed.Each of those editions DID add good things to the game, and I think that i
I come at it from a more technical side, and here are a few things that WotC violated that caused me to lose respect for them technically, just with Essentials...
* Don't break the existing structure (Essentials-Martial-style classes are fundamentally incompatible with the existing AEDU structure; it would be incredibly difficult to create hybrid versions and they'd be mechanically very different from hybrid versions of other classes; you mostly can't multiclass into them, and multiclassing out of them is highly restricted even as compared to the generally weak and expensive 4E multiclassing system) * Be aware of basic assumptions of the existing system, and don't violate them (Basic Attacks were inferior options so there was room to pile features on them in restricted circumstances... then Essentials-Martial-style classes piled huge features on them all the time) * Be aware of, and respect, what's in the existing system (the existence of the Hunter-option Ranger was no secret, but WotC decided to also release the Hunter-subclass Ranger)
I come at it from a more technical side, and here are a few things that WotC violated that caused me to lose respect for them technically, just with Essentials...* Don't break the existing structure (Essentials-Martial-style classes are fundamentally
Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
Be careful of falling into the Pit of Edition Warring Despair! It is a foul place from which there is no return!
Remember, a community is a joint effort of all those involved, and while we want intellegent meaningful and productive banter to ensue we also need it to be polite and considerate of others. Believe us when we say it is possible.
Thank you for your time and support as we continue to try and make a great community for everyone.
We’ve removed content from this thread because of a violation of the Code of Conduct.You can review the Code here: www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_...Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.You
WotC technically alientated me when they released 3E, but that's for another thread. However, they got me back with 4E so it's all good. There is only 1 thing they would need to do to permanently alienate me (and by "alienate", I mean drive me away entirely so that I would not purchase any more of their products): stop the develpment of 5E and let it die along with 4E. That's about it. Since they're not going to do that, though, I don't have much to worry about.
What could they do to make me a very happy camper?
1- NOT switch design ideals 2 years into 5E. 2- Make Dragon and Dungeon worth reading again. 3- PDF the entire lot of D&D products to date. 4- A fresh, new campaign setting instead of rehashing the Realms and Eberron over and over
WotC technically alientated me when they released 3E, but that's for another thread. However, they got me back with 4E so it's all good. There is only 1 thing they would need to do to permanently alienate me (and by "alienate", I mean drive me away e
#52 Fail to make proper digital tools or make poor digital tools.
Its the age of the mobile device now, please make cross platform digital tools possibly using HTML5/jQuery/Ajax/CSS3 etc...etc... that can run on just about anything!
#52 Fail to make proper digital tools or make poor digital tools.Its the age of the mobile device now, please make cross platform digital tools possibly using HTML5/jQuery/Ajax/CSS3 etc...etc... that can run on just about anything!
By the way I don't call making a statement that they weren't working on 4e and then two weeks later announcing it at GenCon 'Changing Directions' I call that outright lying.
You should note that Wizards of the Coast is a publically traded company (especially being part of Hasbro). 4th edition would be a huge deal. There are laws preventing wizards of the coast employees from sharing information like (to a select group of individuals) that wihtout the stockholders being notified in a government approved way. Yes it was techncially a lie, but it was a lie that is required by U.S. Law. The game designer did not have the legal ability to share 4th edition with anyone. This is also true because he was under a NDA. You shouldn't blame Wizards for this. It is just how U.S. corporation laws work. Any major announcements must be made in a specific way which can not be viewed as insider trading.
In most cases to comply with the law you have to essentially say the information is false. As everyone knows saying "no comment" meanns the information is true, but you are just ignoring it because you can't technically say it is true.
You should note that Wizards of the Coast is a publically traded company (especially being part of Hasbro). 4th edition would be a huge deal. There are laws preventing wizards of the coast employees from sharing information like (to a select group of
Personally 4e alienated me. At this point getting me back means giving me a reason to play 5e over pathfinder. I'm a sucker for new game systems though, and there is enough about pathfinder that I don't like that pulling me away from it is far from impossible. (I would probably play every campaign in an entirely new system but 1) the other players are not nearly as keen on that idea, 2) I've been burned to many times that game systems are just outright terrible)
Poor quality products is a good one to mention though. I enjoyed d20 modern for a bit, but the terribly written supplements killed the system.
Personally 4e alienated me. At this point getting me back means giving me a reason to play 5e over pathfinder. I'm a sucker for new game systems though, and there is enough about pathfinder that I don't like that pulling me away from it is far from
Personally 4e alienated me. At this point getting me back means giving me a reason to play 5e over pathfinder. I'm a sucker for new game systems though, and there is enough about pathfinder that I don't like that pulling me away from it is far from impossible. (I would probably play every campaign in an entirely new system but 1) the other players are not nearly as keen on that idea, 2) I've been burned to many times that game systems are just outright terrible)
Poor quality products is a good one to mention though. I enjoyed d20 modern for a bit, but the terribly written supplements killed the system.
What business decisions specificly in 4E alienated you?
What business decisions specificly in 4E alienated you?
What business decisions specificly in 4E alienated you?
Fair enough... I didn't read the original post that closely. It was the system that pushed me away, not the way it was sold.
I don't really take the business decisions of Hasbro/WoTC personally such that they have much direct effect on my purchases.
"everything is core" was a transparent way to try to sell more splat books, but they are a business. They exist to make money, and sell books to do that. I wasn't offended or alienated by that.
Now that I think about it... there is one thing that WotC is pretty much synomous with that would guarantee that I wouldn't buy 5e.
Any sort of "random" purchase set-up offends me. I didn't buy those packs of random plastic figures. I don't play MtG, and never would. And personally - anyone out there that does? I look down on you.
Every once in a while WotC trys to bring that model into DnD, fortunately they've mostly gotten slapped down for it, but it's such a lucrative concept (and one that's "just down the hallway" for them) that it keeps popping back up. Its been a while since I followed 4e actually, I seem to remember that did finally sneak some sort of random power card thing into the system, but I don't know how successful that was for them.
Fair enough... I didn't read the original post that closely. It was the system that pushed me away, not the way it was sold.I don't really take the business decisions of Hasbro/WoTC personally such that they have much direct effect on my purchases."
What business decisions specificly in 4E alienated you?
Fair enough... I didn't read the original post that closely. It was the system that pushed me away, not the way it was sold.
I don't really take the business decisions of Hasbro/WoTC personally such that they have much direct effect on my purchases.
"everything is core" was a transparent way to try to sell more splat books, but they are a business. They exist to make money, and sell books to do that. I wasn't offended or alienated by that.
Now that I think about it... there is one thing that WotC is pretty much synomous with that would guarantee that I wouldn't buy 5e.
Any sort of "random" purchase set-up offends me. I didn't buy those packs of random plastic figures. I don't play MtG, and never would. And personally - anyone out there that does? I look down on you.
Every once in a while WotC trys to bring that model into DnD, fortunately they've mostly gotten slapped down for it, but it's such a lucrative concept (and one that's "just down the hallway" for them) that it keeps popping back up. Its been a while since I followed 4e actually, I seem to remember that did finally sneak some sort of random power card thing into the system, but I don't know how successful that was for them.
From the lack of support and the silence on the subject, I'm pretty sure it failed horribly...
Fair enough... I didn't read the original post that closely. It was the system that pushed me away, not the way it was sold.I don't really take the business decisions of Hasbro/WoTC personally such that they have much direct effect on my purchases."
Any sort of "random" purchase set-up offends me. I didn't buy those packs of random plastic figures. I don't play MtG, and never would. And personally - anyone out there that does? I look down on you.
I have a hard time seeing 5e alienating me. 4e proved to be umm divisive. I confess to loving new editions of D&D, I'm bad about dropping whatever campaign I was running at the time and jumping headlong into something that's new and shiny. My group however balked, they didn't want to touch 4e with a 10 foot pole. It caused, and still to some degree continues to cause hard feelings and frustration, even though I get alot of their points and share some of them. I'm prety much just sick of 3rd. I love the system, but we've ran it to death over these last 11 or 12 years.
So for me, 5e is an oasis in the middle of the desert. I love the old school throwback philosophy driving it, I love that it reminds me in many ways of 2e and the fun I had with that. There are some concepts that I'm not a fan of, but overall they're minor points. As long as the dev team continues to be open and continues to take criticism on board, I'm pretty happy. Most important, my group is happy with the general direction of the game. The modular rules concept of the system will work wonders I think in making sure most of the people sitting around the table feel like they have a game they can play, without being excluded. At this point, the only way WoTC would alienate me is if they made a rules set that was only attractive to certain types of players, thus kindling edition wars all over again.
I have a hard time seeing 5e alienating me. 4e proved to be umm divisive. I confess to loving new editions of D&D, I'm bad about dropping whatever campaign I was running at the time and jumping headlong into something that's new and shiny. My group h
Any sort of "random" purchase set-up offends me. I didn't buy those packs of random plastic figures. I don't play MtG, and never would. And personally - anyone out there that does? I look down on you.
Wow... Just wow...
He probably looks down on people who play WoW too
Wow... Just wow...[/quote]He probably looks down on people who play WoW too:)
Any sort of "random" purchase set-up offends me. I didn't buy those packs of random plastic figures. I don't play MtG, and never would. And personally - anyone out there that does? I look down on you.
Wow... Just wow...
I agree. If someone is having fun with a game, they are winning. Thats the sole purpose of entertainment.
Wow... Just wow...[/quote]I agree. If someone is having fun with a game, they are winning. Thats the sole purpose of entertainment.
Any sort of "random" purchase set-up offends me. I didn't buy those packs of random plastic figures. I don't play MtG, and never would. And personally - anyone out there that does? I look down on you.
Wow... Just wow...
He probably looks down on people who play WoW too
Well in the case of WOW.... ;-)
Wow... Just wow...[/quote]He probably looks down on people who play WoW too:) [/quote]Well in the case of WOW.... ;-)
Any sort of "random" purchase set-up offends me. I didn't buy those packs of random plastic figures. I don't play MtG, and never would. And personally - anyone out there that does? I look down on you.
That was a really unfortunate thing to say. MtG is played by people with ridiculously high IQ's, MIT and CMU have both historically had significant numbers of players, and any given person with a Computer Science degree or Engineering degree has a pretty decent probability of having played it at some point.
So basically, what I'm getting at, is you just insulted a pretty fair number of people who're very likely an order of magnitude more intelligent than you are.
So while you're welcome to look down on people who are headed for 6 figure salaries and incredibly well respected positions, you're really going to be alone in "Looking down on them".
That was a really unfortunate thing to say. MtG is played by people with ridiculously high IQ's, MIT and CMU have both historically had significant numbers of players, and any given person with a Computer Science degree or Engineering degree has a
The mini/army men shoved down my throat in 3rd and 4th Ed started to get to me (focus on miniatures would alienate me), they really tried to make you play with action figures or what-have-you, I have nothing against miniatures (I have used them extensively), but they went too far; set up your tiles, put your toys on, and play this skirmish board-game, which is fine, but not as default (on the back of the 4th Ed PHB it says you need tiles and miniatures).
The mini/army men shoved down my throat in 3rd and 4th Ed started to get to me (focus on miniatures would alienate me), they really tried to make you play with action figures or what-have-you, I have nothing against miniatures (I have used them exten
The big thing that would alienate me would be if they continue to use backhanded methods to keep the edition wars going. Even though they publicly denounce them here, the panels I have been to and the columns/interviews I have read have shown many at WotC to use subtle comments to deride one or more editions of the game, which is just more kindling for the fire.
That and if WotC tried to throw a rock through my windshield. That would probably alienate me and make me a lost customer also.
The big thing that would alienate me would be if they continue to use backhanded methods to keep the edition wars going. Even though they publicly denounce them here, the panels I have been to and the columns/interviews I have read have shown many at
By the way I don't call making a statement that they weren't working on 4e and then two weeks later announcing it at GenCon 'Changing Directions' I call that outright lying.
You should note that Wizards of the Coast is a publically traded company (especially being part of Hasbro). 4th edition would be a huge deal. There are laws preventing wizards of the coast employees from sharing information like (to a select group of individuals) that wihtout the stockholders being notified in a government approved way. Yes it was techncially a lie, but it was a lie that is required by U.S. Law. The game designer did not have the legal ability to share 4th edition with anyone. This is also true because he was under a NDA. You shouldn't blame Wizards for this. It is just how U.S. corporation laws work. Any major announcements must be made in a specific way which can not be viewed as insider trading.
In most cases to comply with the law you have to essentially say the information is false. As everyone knows saying "no comment" meanns the information is true, but you are just ignoring it because you can't technically say it is true.
For some reason that hadn't occured to me, even though I know that they're owned by Hasbro. Don't get me wrong, I love 4e, and I'm ultimately glad they did it. Overall I don't hate or despise WotC. I think their run with D&D is up though, and they need to give up the license to someone else, but that's my own opinion. And though I am unimpressed with Next and have no plans to deal with it at all, with a few exceptions of stealing things I like from it and making them work with my 4e games, I have to hand it to them by being open about the fact that they are making it.
As a whole, WotC is an 'Edition Happy' company. They like to make new editions, even if it means just tweaking the rules here and there and rereleasing the exact same material (look at The PHB and HotFL, HotFK, and RC or even M:tG). My main complaint about Next is that it doesn't seem like they have any plans to fill out the rest of the implied library of books for 4e. Where are Arcane, Divine, Primal, and Psionic Power 2? Or The rest of the Racial Guides (of which there is only Dragonborn and Tiefling)? Where is the further support for Seekers, Runepriests, Shroud Assassins, as well as the various newer races they have just released going to come from? Where is the boxed set for the Feywild?
It really seems to me that they just dropped 4e, quite literally in the middle of production to start on Next. And honestly, now that I think about it, that's what really has alienated me. They need to finish 4e before they complete and release Next and it seems that they have no plans to do that.
Oh and @SlappyLamer - Go ahead and look down on me. I love my WotC miniatures, and I bought them because I knew that no matter what came out of the box, I could use it for something in my game. I look down on you for making a statement that is so close minded and judgemental.
You should note that Wizards of the Coast is a publically traded company (especially being part of Hasbro). 4th edition would be a huge deal. There are laws preventing wizards of the coast employees from sharing information like (to a select group of
I agree with the "random" mini's. Tho I do enjoy playing with mini's, I want to buy specific ones not "random ones. And they need to be readily available not discontinued after a short period of time.
I agree with the "random" mini's. Tho I do enjoy playing with mini's, I want to buy specific ones not "random ones. And they need to be readily available not discontinued after a short period of time.
I'd be even more happier if they sold thematic,non random sets of miniatures for a reasonable price.
For example aberration set 1&2, goblinoids 1,2 ,3 and so on.
I'd be even more happier if they sold thematic,non random sets of miniatures for a reasonable price.For example aberration set 1&2, goblinoids 1,2 ,3 and so on.
I'd be even more happier if they sold thematic,non random sets of miniatures for a reasonable price.
For example aberration set 1&2, goblinoids 1,2 ,3 and so on.
I was asking for this when 4E was first released. Most of my Minis insiders tell me non-randomized are going to be expensive and not terribly profittable. Let's not even touch the hornet's nest of "3D Printers".
I was asking for this when 4E was first released. Most of my Minis insiders tell me non-randomized are going to be expensive and not terribly profittable.Let's not even touch the hornet's nest of "3D Printers".
I'd be even more happier if they sold thematic,non random sets of miniatures for a reasonable price.
For example aberration set 1&2, goblinoids 1,2 ,3 and so on.
I was asking for this when 4E was first released. Most of my Minis insiders tell me non-randomized are going to be expensive and not terribly profittable. Let's not even touch the hornet's nest of "3D Printers".
Really I wouldn't care if they were randomized if I were able to see what I was getting before hand. I mean just put 1 very rare, 2 rare, and 4 common minis in a clear plastic container and let people pick which box they buy. Then sell them individually at a higher price for those that want them. From my experience in working in the plastics industry (at the bottom level in manufacturing) the cost of a mini is about the same production wise they use about the same plastic about the same paint all the costs are about the same (with the exception of clear plastics being slightly more expensive). So what they talk about with the cost being too high is probably their projected profit margin. So a beholder might cost exactly the same to produce as an orc of the same size, but they expect to be able to sell the beholder for X amount more than the orc because its 'cooler' or whatever. Once they remove that thought process and return to an X% profit on each mini they don't have a problem. In fact the price of the minis could go down with that and they would make more money on bulk sales. Really it just seems they wanted another MTG and didn't realize that players didn't want that...
I was asking for this when 4E was first released. Most of my Minis insiders tell me non-randomized are going to be expensive and not terribly profittable.Let's not even touch the hornet's nest of "3D Printers". [/quote]Really I wouldn't care if they
I totally agree with you lokiare. currenty,at my fav comic shop, the minis are at a discounted price of 9.90Euro.And no one still buy them. This mean that with a 8 piece booster, to complete a 60 mini set i'd have to spend about 500euro...and have lots of double o even triple ones. Also,common or uncommon ones dont sell well on the web,and selling minis on internet is a great time investment (who i dont have). I was taken away from MTG for the same reasons: too costly,and too much money involved to complete a set. So, if they sell complete sets i'dgladly pay something more to not to bother with randomness,otherwise,as it is now the case,i spend nothing. Sturdy paper miniatures (as the recently released pathfinder bestiary ones) are really cool (i own 2 sets of them) and cost 1/10 of the plastic ones.
I totally agree with you lokiare. currenty,at my fav comic shop, the minis are at a discounted price of 9.90Euro.And no one still buy them.This mean that with a 8 piece booster, to complete a 60 mini set i'd have to spend about 500euro...and have lo
~snip~ Really it just seems they wanted another MTG and didn't realize that players didn't want that...
Bingo. That's WotC's flagship. The Original Card Board Crack peddler. With forced obsoletion to further drive the market. Everything will be compared to it.
The more Hasbro meddles, the more they will expect profit in lines with static/reskinned board games.
Bingo.That's WotC's flagship. The Original Card Board Crack peddler. With forced obsoletion to further drive the market.Everything will be compared to it.The more Hasbro meddles, the more they will expect profit in lines with static/reskinned board g
Any sort of "random" purchase set-up offends me. I didn't buy those packs of random plastic figures. I don't play MtG, and never would. And personally - anyone out there that does? I look down on you.
That was a really unfortunate thing to say. MtG is played by people with ridiculously high IQ's, MIT and CMU have both historically had significant numbers of players, and any given person with a Computer Science degree or Engineering degree has a pretty decent probability of having played it at some point.
So basically, what I'm getting at, is you just insulted a pretty fair number of people who're very likely an order of magnitude more intelligent than you are.
So while you're welcome to look down on people who are headed for 6 figure salaries and incredibly well respected positions, you're really going to be alone in "Looking down on them".
To be honest neither someone's tested IQ or their income (or future income) has any innate effect on whether I agree with their decisions in life. (I don't personally go around insulting the poor and stupid either)
The CCG setup is so blatantly manipulative*... but whatever it's your choice, it's your money. I'm not here to get into an argument on that subject. (Also doing so would really imply that I was much more serious with this statement than I really am)
I realize also that MtG and similiar games use the inflated prices of "rares" as a way of balancing more powerful cards. When you apply that randomization to something that lacks even the metagame justifications all you're left with is the manipulative gouging.
*I suppose it's possible at some point in the history of game's development that rares were just concieved of as being "rare". Only some players will have them and other players will marvel when the occasional giant world destroying monster drops onto the field. The fact that players responded to this by buying hundreds of dollars worth of cards just to get the one they actually wanted - or buy those rare cards outright for hundreds of dollars - was perhaps just a (profitable) accident. That defense only applys to the original design and release of the game though, and definately not to the imitators that flooded in afterwards.
Oh well, even if I try to direct this away from seeming like troll-bait, it's still off-topic.
All you MtG players will survive my snide internet condescension just as I survive the scorn of the well-heeled intelligensia. C'est la vie. (I totally drop french phrases into my speech on a daily basis)
edit: I inherited the messed up quote tags from the post I quoted... fixed
That was a really unfortunate thing to say. MtG is played by people with ridiculously high IQ's, MIT and CMU have both historically had significant numbers of players, and any given person with a Computer Science degree or Engineering degree has a
For the game, it should be quality over quantity, and for the business practice it should embrace the community versus pushing it away or controlling it (ala digital content). And above all else, WOTC please be consistent, think before you speak, and be accountable for your actions.
For the game, it should be quality over quantity, and for the business practice it should embrace the community versus pushing it away or controlling it (ala digital content). And above all else, WOTC please be consistent, think before you speak, and
WotC would alienate me if instead of simply having 5E provide for different styles of D&D they instead cave in to people asking for validation of their playstyle over that of others. This is important enough to me that it would alienate me if they end up doing it by accident, and I'm looking for them to make a concerted effort to avoid validating some playstyles over others.
WotC would alienate me if instead of simply having 5E provide for different styles of D&D they instead cave in to people asking for validation of their playstyle over that of others. This is important enough to me that it would alienate me if they en
For me it would be dropping support for 4e like a hot potato, just to force me onto 5e. I pay for a DDi subscription so I can use the character builder and store my characters online.
If that goes, then I would be cutting my subscription. The magazine content has been rather hit and miss for a while now. It has gotten better of late, but only after a large break. So it's mainly the OCB that's keeping me here.
At present, 5e doesn't really appeal to me for many reasons and I have players who are happy with 4e. I have a lot of books and adventures yet to be played so that will keep us going for years. I might even be good enough by then to create my own adventures.
But I've found creating 4e characters by hand is quite hard due to the amount of material available. It's just easier to have the computer do it for me/us.
For me it would be dropping support for 4e like a hot potato, just to force me onto 5e.I pay for a DDi subscription so I can use the character builder and store my characters online.If that goes, then I would be cutting my subscription. The magazine
1) Dropping online support for 4E. As far as I'm concerned if you spend a half-a-decade trying to drive people to online support and structure the game such that it's rather difficult to play sans online support you create an implicit contract with your player to preserve said online support.
2) Not allowing substantial 3rd Party Support. Don't care about the details too much as long as it's there, but WoTC hasn't proven able to support it's own products sufficiently. I'll take my chances having to dig through some duds to find the high quality material WoTC by and large doesn't seem willing/able to provide.
3) Not selling content via PDFs, especially for adventures (I want to be able to write in the margins)
1) Dropping online support for 4E. As far as I'm concerned if you spend a half-a-decade trying to drive people to online support and structure the game such that it's rather difficult to play sans online support you create an implicit contract with y
Bussiness practices that alienated me or known friends.
1) dragon and dungeon being a subscription only option.
They are great hooks for players and dms alike. They can help new parties with new ideas and adventures without having to pay for a big published adventure or setting. Kids bought them and used them. Why demand a master card for this? Base magazine printing on demand but keep the option there.
2) lack of dm support.
So many splatbooks, so many players options but so few dm tools, so few quality adventures.
3) lack of campaign support
Balance your splatbooks with fluff/adventure books, board games easily available to a non rpg crowd. This will keep power creep out of our edition for a longer period. It will make campaign fans happy. Pick 1,2 or 3 settings and support them within reason. Give other settings to 3rd parties so they can support those as well.
Balance is important both in game mechanics and product line if we want a successful edition. Something stable and exciting that will inevitably attract a larger crowd.
4) The less is more mentality.
I cant understand it and I dont like it. For me it was always a poor marketing strategy trying to convince me that I should pay the same price for less content and I should be happy about it.
Once again great topic iokiare.Bussiness practices that alienated me or known friends.1) dragon and dungeon being a subscription only option. They are great hooks for players and dms alike. They can help new parties with new ideas and adventures with
Bussiness practices that alienated me or known friends.
1) dragon and dungeon being a subscription only option.
They are great hooks for players and dms alike. They can help new parties with new ideas and adventures without having to pay for a big published adventure or setting. Kids bought them and used them. Why demand a master card for this? Base magazine printing on demand but keep the option there.
2) lack of dm support.
So many splatbooks, so many players options but so few dm tools, so few quality adventures.
3) lack of campaign support
Balance your splatbooks with fluff/adventure books, board games easily available to a non rpg crowd. This will keep power creep out of our edition for a longer period. It will make campaign fans happy. Pick 1,2 or 3 settings and support them within reason. Give other settings to 3rd parties so they can support those as well.
Balance is important both in game mechanics and product line if we want a successful edition. Something stable and exciting that will inevitably attract a larger crowd.
4) The less is more mentality.
I cant understand it and I dont like it. For me it was always a poor marketing strategy trying to convince me that I should pay the same price for less content and I should be happy about it.
Thank you, and I agree with everything you said. Mostly I just think WotC is asking the wrong questions. One of their surveys should have the title to this thread as a question with a big blank box to type in what you want and then have someone collate it into the biggest categories...
Thank you, and I agree with everything you said. Mostly I just think WotC is asking the wrong questions. One of their surveys should have the title to this thread as a question with a big blank box to type in what you want and then have someone colla
Thank you, and I agree with everything you said. Mostly I just think WotC is asking the wrong questions. One of their surveys should have the title to this thread as a question with a big blank box to type in what you want and then have someone collate it into the biggest categories...
What a Market Research nightmare that would be! I agree with you and Promitheas though!
What a Market Research nightmare that would be! I agree with you and Promitheas though!
At this point I don't really think that WotC can maintain me as a customer. Too many of the base assumptions in 5th are contrary to the type of game I want to play.
Beyond that there is an underlying feeling of unease or contempt for a certain edition of the game that is unwelcome and unnecessary.
I participate in the conversation and the playtest because I love the hobby and want the game to succeed, but 5th is not going to be a game I am likely to play.
At this point I don't really think that WotC can maintain me as a customer. Too many of the base assumptions in 5th are contrary to the type of game I want to play. Beyond that there is an underlying feeling of unease or contempt for a certain edit
There are hundreds of thread for that.
