Quote from: Batman;772014Probably because a person has a VERY specific idea on what their character should/can do and that the rules don't do it justice to their mind OR don't cover it at all. Some examples:

• Wolverine-style character: How do you build that? What weapons and class? How do you factor in the animal-esque qualities? Not to mention regeneration or adamantium skeletal structure (the later two are hard in almost any D&D edition to pull off).

• Beast Wars Transformers: A Warforged Druid? or Wizard with Polymorph?

It's funny you should mention those two examples, because in my Eberron campaigns I once featured X-Men and Brotherhood analogues who all had Abberrant Dragonmarks. Wolverine was a razorclaw shifter Barbarian (this what 3.5, but once shifters are out for 4e, as I'm sure they will be, it won't be a problem to do in 5e.). And in that same campaign we explicitly based the Lord of Blades and his bunch on the Decepticons (except for the lack of shapeshifting)

(For the record, this was deliberately meant to be a not-very-serious campaign, so having NPCs that were goofs on pop culture figures was totally appropriate.)

If someone wants to play Wolverine, I'd suggest they play a superhero game. But then we get into the whole "setting limits" thing, where folks don't get their candy, and, well...gosh we just can't have that.

But, to be serious, ran a short campaign recently where a character found some gauntlets that had blades pop out of the knuckles. There's your Wolverine (or as close as I'm getting to someone who can regenerate from one scrap after a nuclear explosion).

Quote from: Marleycat;772043Or just maybe your generation's touchstones are different then mine or our children? Naw, that isn't possible at all. :rolleyes:

probably not, judging by the evidence we have in front of us.  I mean, I suppose you could try to take my statement as some sort of personal dig at you, but what I'm referring to is that D&D took a huge diversion off of what d&D was with 4e and we all saw the result.  This, coupled with the direction of of 5e combined with the overall reception of it sure seems to point to them realizing that making d&d back to what it was to be d&d was the right move.

sort of like new coke.  It has nothing to do with the older generation not respecting the desires of the new generation.  It had to do old coke just being better coke.

don't be something you're not is the lesson here.  Ergo, d&d shouldn't try to be the best for superhero type games, or MMO games.  It should give the "d&d experience"

Quote from: LibraryLass;772044It's funny you should mention those two examples, because in my Eberron campaigns I once featured X-Men and Brotherhood analogues who all had Abberrant Dragonmarks. Wolverine was a razorclaw shifter Barbarian (this what 3.5, but once shifters are out for 4e, as I'm sure they will be, it won't be a problem to do in 5e.). And in that same campaign we explicitly based the Lord of Blades and his bunch on the Decepticons (except for the lack of shapeshifting)

(For the record, this was deliberately meant to be a not-very-serious campaign, so having NPCs that were goofs on pop culture figures was totally appropriate.)

Love it. I never heard about Shifters until 4e. I'm confident you could do it with either a Barbarian/Druid/Fighter/Ranger subclass.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;772049don't be something you're not is the lesson here.  Ergo, d&d shouldn't try to be the best for superhero type games, or MMO games.  It should give the "d&d experience"

Ok, in this context you're correct.

Quote from: Marleycat;772052Ok, in this context you're correct.

to continue the soda analogy, some people don't like coke, and that's perfectly fine.  Some may like Pepsi, or some may like something else.  But it would be a huge mistake on coke's part to try to make their beverage to cover all of those other tastes.  Ever mixed a dozen sodas into one glass?  How well did that work out?  D&D shouldn't try mix all the flavors.  Be it's own flavor

Quote from: Sacrosanct;772049It has nothing to do with the older generation not respecting the desires of the new generation.

I'll admit it. I don't respect their desires. Tell you why -- I was a young, smart ass iconoclastic bastard, too. "Nothing old is good." Now I know I was just talking out my ass. If young me was standing right here, old me would tell him to fuck off (after admitting technology is great, man...but fuck off, young sir...fuck off....).

Quote from: Marleycat;772040Nice. Psst....you have 6 other choices already.

Basic only has rules for Life, right? Or did I miss something?

Quote from: Will;772056Basic only has rules for Life, right? Or did I miss something?

It does. Are you referring to the PHB, Marleycat? What am I missing?

Quote from: cranebump;772058It does. Are you referring to the PHB, Marleycat? What am I missing?

The PHB (should be easy to get the information about the other 6 domains, or at least have a framework to homebrew your own for your personal setting right?

Quote from: Sacrosanct;772054to continue the soda analogy, some people don't like coke, and that's perfectly fine.  Some may like Pepsi, or some may like something else.  But it would be a huge mistake on coke's part to try to make their beverage to cover all of those other tastes.  Ever mixed a dozen sodas into one glass?  How well did that work out?  D&D shouldn't try mix all the flavors.  Be it's own flavor

Yessir, I have it's called a graveyard or zombie or other terms... it's GOOD.

Dnd is it's own flavor because it's so mutable.

Marleycat, I was responding to this subthread:

Quote from: Haffrung;772008I just don't get the mania for customization. Even in Basic, between the sub-races and classes there are 28 combinations. Factor in domains, fighting styles, and arcane traditions and we're at 154. Add backgrounds (even from the paltry 5 included in Basic) and you're at 770 possible configurations. In the most Basic iteration of the game. And that's not even considering ideals, bonds, and flaws. Now consider the archetypes, sub-classes, feats, and new backgrounds that will come out with the PHB, which will bring the different possible PC configurations into the tens of thousands, and and I can't even begin to fathom why some people instantly need more options. Before they've even played. It boggles my mind.

I wasn't suggesting 5e entirely, but I DO think people are going to want more than Basic.

Quote from: Haffrung;772008Now consider the archetypes, sub-classes, feats, and new backgrounds that will come out with the PHB, which will bring the different possible PC configurations into the tens of thousands, and and I can't even begin to fathom why some people instantly need more options. Before they've even played. It boggles my mind.

  Counterpoint: Over 40 years, over half a dozen distinct versions (and more if you count subdivisions, spinoffs, and clones), easily over a dozen official settings, and countless unofficial productions, there have been a lot of options put forth for D&D. Not all of them will be in the core book, so some people are going to be disappointed.

  And it's not all weird and esoteric stuff that will be missing, either. The cloistered cleric/White Mage archetype doesn't appear to be an option in the PHB.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;772049probably not, judging by the evidence we have in front of us.  I mean, I suppose you could try to take my statement as some sort of personal dig at you, but what I'm referring to is that D&D took a huge diversion off of what d&D was with 4e and we all saw the result.  This, coupled with the direction of of 5e combined with the overall reception of it sure seems to point to them realizing that making d&d back to what it was to be d&d was the right move.

  Well, it looks promising, but it's early days yet--remember, 4E outsold 3E at launch. We'll have to see if it has legs.

Quotedon't be something you're not is the lesson here.  Ergo, d&d shouldn't try to be the best for superhero type games, or MMO games.  It should give the "d&d experience"

  From everything they said, I think they were trying for the D&D experience with 4E--they just didn't understand how much of the D&D experience was tied up in the weird, traditional and sometimes clunky elements of previous games, and they considered it to involve a lot more mechanical engagement than a lot of the market seems to have wanted.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;772054to continue the soda analogy, some people don't like coke, and that's perfectly fine.  Some may like Pepsi, or some may like something else.  But it would be a huge mistake on coke's part to try to make their beverage to cover all of those other tastes.  Ever mixed a dozen sodas into one glass?  How well did that work out?  D&D shouldn't try mix all the flavors.  Be it's own flavor

Alternately, they could offer a bunch of different flavors and let each customer choose the one they prefer.

Second-place spaghetti sauce manufacturer, Prego had a can't-miss plan. They'd have Psychophysicist Dr. Howard Moskowitz determine the formulation for the "perfect" spaghetti sauce, with the flavor and texture that was most liked by the most people. Then, in one swoop, they'd unseat category leader Ragu.

But Dr. Moskowitz's proved (to Prego's initial dismay) there was no such thing as one perfect sauce, and that if Prego created a sauce that hit the "sweet spot" between the different sauces that different people liked, they'd have a sauce that millions would find acceptable, but nobody would love.

Dr. Moskowitz still saved the day, though. He went on to prove that if Prego looked at people not as one, big group of spaghetti sauce consumers, but as a groups of people who clustered around particular spaghetti sauce traits, then made multiple kinds of sauce, they could divide the market and conquer Ragu.

Thus was created Prego Extra Chunky, and thus was Ragu moved to the number two position in the category.

http://www.drumcircleco.com/brandz/malcolm-gladwell-howard-moskowitz-spaghetti-sauce-and-the-end-of-endless-line-extensions/