Quote from: Bobloblah;693215That's because your life has only one true love in it, and she has 2 'Ds', an 'A', and a '2' in her name.

AD&D 2e Revised!

Quote from: TristramEvans;6931994e was taken as the pinnacle of mechanical balance, by giving every class magic, tailoring monsters to the level of adventurers so PCs never face a threat they can't defeat by violence, and removing niche protection to a meta game division based on tactical roles a character plays in the party. This would be the sort of stuff I'm wary of nowadays when I hear the term " mathematical balance".

That's an arbitrarily narrow interpretation, not apparently warranted by the context. Have you seen the playtest packet? That, according to the statement, is what's to be checked. If the stuff you fear is in there, then presumably it's bad enough even if it's statistically a pile of crap. If it's not, then it seems to me you may be worrying too much.

Quote from: Obeeron;693171Actually, the final straw for me was when a couple of the biggest complainers about Next mentioned that they don't actually play RPGs because they "can't find anyone to play with".

:rolleyes: Yeah here it's totally different.  They don't need G+ or any of those BS 'internet roleplaying services'.  They all sit down face to face. :rolleyes:

Quote from: Sommerjon;693218The fuck it's not.

This tells me that you know jack shit about old school play, but we knew that already.

Quote from: Sommerjon;693218This whole self denial bullshit about ad&d not having builds is laughable.  WTF did you do when you leveled?  You roll on some chart to see if you you were going to do?
Well shit I rolled a 2, guess I retire this guy and roll a new one.
Hot Fucking Damn! I rolled 00 I get to dual class! Awesome.
WTF ever:rolleyes:

The fact that you cannot distinguish between advancement and builds is telling. An AD&D fighter advances in level and gets generally better at fighting. A 3.X fighter chooses options that support a particular build during advancement.

In answer to your question, you rolled for more HP and got the fuck on with the game.

Quote from: Sommerjon;693218We have no idea of the "success" of the playtests.
Amusing to see the difference here.  When WotC was talking about the "success" of 4e this place used up pallets of toilet paper shitting on that 'corp speak' BS.  Now that the new hotness is more akin to the preferred playstyle here 'they speaketh da trutheth'

The playtests were just market research to determine what the majority of people wanted in the core game. They showed the fans bits and pieces of ideas to see which ones gained the most traction. They found out what they wanted to know, thus the playtest was a "success".

I have no idea if what they publish will be compatible with my preferred playstyle. I'm just going to wait and see, reserving judgement until after I have a chance to see the finished product. The same chance I gave 4E.

Quote from: vytzka;693219AD&D 2e Revised!

Bah! A pox on your 'revised' house. The original lass is the only one for me.

Quote from: Sommerjon;693222:rolleyes: Yeah here it's totally different.  They don't need G+ or any of those BS 'internet roleplaying services'.  They all sit down face to face. :rolleyes:

You shut your face! Online roleplaying is a thing.

Quote from: Bobloblah;693226Bah! A pox on your 'revised' house. The original lass is the only one for me.

Pfffft. Revised has some "skills and powers". If you know what I mean.

Quote from: Phillip;693221That's an arbitrarily narrow interpretation, not apparently warranted by the context. Have you seen the playtest packet? That, according to the statement, is what's to be checked. If the stuff you fear is in there, then presumably it's bad enough even if it's statistically a pile of crap. If it's not, then it seems to me you may be worrying too much.

The context here is the author, the company, and the terminology.

But just to be clear, when I say "wary", I don't mean

"AAAH! They're going to ruin D&D!"

or

"AAAH! 5th edition is going to FAIL!"

or even

"AAAH! Badwrongfun!"

I mean worried I'm not going to like this edition anymore than I liked WoTC's other editions. But I'm also well aware I'm not the target audience for this game.

Quote from: Sommerjon;693218Now that the new hotness is more akin to the preferred playstyle here 'they speaketh da trutheth'

Well, duh.

Quote from: Sommerjon;693222:rolleyes: Yeah here it's totally different.  They don't need G+ or any of those BS 'internet roleplaying services'.  They all sit down face to face. :rolleyes:

I didn't say anything about face to face vs virtual.  The two I'm thinking of claim they don't play in any way.

Quote from: vytzka;693232Pfffft. Revised has some "skills and powers". If you know what I mean.

She's just a dirty whore! Willing to put out whatever kind of power-tripping character anyone who can pay the point-cost asks for!

Quote from: Obeeron;693242I didn't say anything about face to face vs virtual.  The two I'm thinking of claim they don't play in any way.

Ignore him. He's an idiot, and currently appears to be off his meds.

Quote from: Sommerjon;693218The fuck it's not.

You do realize the OSR has lasted longer than 3 editions of D&D, and actually forms a continuity starting with 2nd edition ceasing publication, meaning this "fad" is as old as the hobby itself and shows no signs of ever ceasing for as long as people continue to play RPGs?

Quote from: Exploderwizard;693224This tells me that you know jack shit about old school play, but we knew that already.

Really?  The wave of osr shit hits the hobby and looky at what Mearls is doing, 'going back to the simpler times'.  Yeah no correlations can be drawn at all. :rolleyes:

Quote from: Exploderwizard;693224The fact that you cannot distinguish between advancement and builds is telling. An AD&D fighter advances in level and gets generally better at fighting. A 3.X fighter chooses options that support a particular build during advancement.

In answer to your question, you rolled for more HP and got the fuck on with the game.

Yeah no one at any time ever ever ever, made a plan on what to do with their character at all ever ever ever. :rolleyes:
It was all quink-a-dink on what the character became. :rolleyes:

Quote from: Exploderwizard;693224The playtests were just market research to determine what the majority of people wanted in the core game. They showed the fans bits and pieces of ideas to see which ones gained the most traction. They found out what they wanted to know, thus the playtest was a "success".

Sure...
No way it could be a marketing ploy, no way no how!

Quote from: Exploderwizard;693159"a more modern AD&D" = casual gamers

4E crowd= 4vengers

Pathfinder crowd= charop extremists

OSR crowd= OSR Taliban

If you've got Strong Opinions on systems, like any of these, you clearly aren't some sort of 'casual' gamer. The casual player doesn't go for any thing in particular, they just join whatever's getting played.

You can't make your game popular by targeting them, because they don't give a shit.

Quote from: Ladybird;693268If you've got Strong Opinions on systems, like any of these, you clearly aren't some sort of 'casual' gamer. The casual player doesn't go for any thing in particular, they just join whatever's getting played.

You can't make your game popular by targeting them, because they don't give a shit.

I think that's not true, because that excludes the middle, and by definition almost, I think what we like to call casual gamers are people who are in the middle. I think most gamers actually care what they play as far as their immediate game tables and buddies are concerned. They do have opinions, likes and dislikes, they know when they're having less fun than last week, it's just that they're not making the expression of these opinions on the internet or anywhere really the defining element of their gaming personality or whatnot.

Quote from: Benoist;693270I think that's not true, because that excludes the middle, and by definition almost, I think what we like to call casual gamers are people who are in the middle. I think most gamers actually care what they play as far as their immediate game tables and buddies are concerned. They do have opinions, likes and dislikes, they know when they're having less fun than last week, it's just that they're not making airing these opinions the defining element of their gaming personality or whatnot.

I think because of their non-engagement with the "hard-core" they've stumbled on the great truth of RPGs that make them fun in the first place. That they are about so much more than the rules or the books or all the faff you buy from stores.

Something the hobbyists lost sight of in our never ending quest to cram our collective head up our ass.

In fact I think RPGs are pretty poorly suited to the type of obsessive nerd that infests many hobbies. Which probably explains why everyone is so unhappy with RPGs all the time. "15 minutes of fun crammed into 4 hours" and the like.

The type of holistic experience best provided by RPGs is anathema to obsessive mouth breathers.