Quote from: AlnagSett, I think you are reading too much in too little...

You can add that to most of his threads. The rest of his threads are setting up contrived definitions or scenarios and then railing at anyone who refuses to agree with him.

Quote from: Or take mearls: He said "on-air", that after havong played 4e, he never ever wants to play 3e again. But what is he actually doing? Right, playing OD&D! At WotC, nonetheless![/QUOTEUm, those aren't inconsistent positions.  He said OD&D was very different to 4e, a different sort of fun.  So, 3e is not as good as 4e at one kind of fun, OD&D provides a different sort of fun to both.

Makes sense to me.

Regarding the laser-sharks, can I put class and creature templates over those?  For example, can I have a Half-Celestial Laser-Shark?  Because if not, I'll have to boycott 4e.

< doubling your fun with a double post >

Quote from: BalbinusUm, those aren't inconsistent positions.  He said OD&D was very different to 4e, a different sort of fun.  So, 3e is not as good as 4e at one kind of fun, OD&D provides a different sort of fun to both.

I wonder if this isn't a position lots of people will take. 4E sounds like the sort of game which could potentially be very polarising: people who like all the D&D features and tropes junked will reflexively scurry back to AD&D 1E and B/X and OD&D as a reaction to that, whereas people keen on reengineering the D&D system will seize on 4E as the next bold step, and look down on 3E as a poor, sad hybrid, trying to be innovative whilst at the same time clutching to elements which were jettisoned with 4E.

Once 4E comes out, the D20 Haven and Pathfinder crowd had better take a good look at it and try to come up with an answer to the question "Why play 3E rather than AD&D, B/X, BECMI, OD&D or 4E?" The guys on Dragonsfoot can doubtless provide a bunch of arguments as to why they prefer the approach in the various versions of D&D they cover; the 4E fans will probably have their own views on the subject. If the 3.X grognards really want their edition to survive, they need to take a good look at it and give a compelling argument that it can provide something which simply isn't supported to the same extent in 4E or in earlier editions. So far, I'm not sure that I've seen that.

Quote from: 1of3Where?

:ditto: :wtfsign: :pics:

Caesar Slaad provides an excellent start. Now let's have some links! Or is the picture our roman frog gave the picture in question?

Quote from: AlnagMy current view of 4E is that it indeed has deep gulp of "Ronnishness" in it. Which might not be as bad per se, but somehow I expect great yet short boom followed by quick disillusionment and than 5E. I feel somewhat alienated by this outcome already although I am going to try it anyway.

Yep.

In so many ways, 4e is destined to be the new 2e.

Quote from: WarthurOnce 4E comes out, the D20 Haven and Pathfinder crowd had better take a good look at it and try to come up with an answer to the question "Why play 3E rather than AD&D, B/X, BECMI, OD&D or 4E?" The guys on Dragonsfoot can doubtless provide a bunch of arguments as to why they prefer the approach in the various versions of D&D they cover; the 4E fans will probably have their own views on the subject. If the 3.X grognards really want their edition to survive, they need to take a good look at it and give a compelling argument that it can provide something which simply isn't supported to the same extent in 4E or in earlier editions. So far, I'm not sure that I've seen that.

Wow - a mention! Thanks!

And don't think it isn't on my mind. Perhaps not in the way you mean it. But here's the thing - 3e ain't perfect, IMHO. The question isn't about that. One of the beauties, however, is that the OGL means we can have a thriving discussion about how different people would make their own next version. If you have a moment, take a look at J Arcane and I discussing very different views on feats (without vitriol!).

Nonetheless - thanks for the mention; I'm truly honored even if it was an afterthought!

Quote from: Dwight:ditto: :wtfsign: :pics:

and his dread enemy!:-

Quote from: Kyle Aaron

"Play Game"? "Options"? "Quit"?

4e really DOES want to be a computer game!!!!!!1

Quote from: James J SkachWow - a mention! Thanks!

And don't think it isn't on my mind. Perhaps not in the way you mean it. But here's the thing - 3e ain't perfect, IMHO. The question isn't about that. One of the beauties, however, is that the OGL means we can have a thriving discussion about how different people would make their own next version. If you have a moment, take a look at J Arcane and I discussing very different views on feats (without vitriol!).

Nonetheless - thanks for the mention; I'm truly honored even if it was an afterthought!

I mentioned you on the basis that D20 Haven seems to want to be the "Dragonsfoot" for 3.X, in the sense that it's a forum for people who enjoy 3.X-based games and don't want to convert to 4E and don't get what they want from earlier editions either (or at the very least least, have gaming itches which only 3.X can scratch), in the same way that Pathfinder seems to be trying to do what Castles & Crusades has done for 1E/2E AD&D - presented a tidied-up version of the rules with improvements.

The problem I foresee is that as more and more editions exist, the die-hard crowd gets more and more fragmented. The current edition of D&D will always have the advantage that it's the current edition, and I'd be inclined to suggest that barring truly grotesque mismanagement of the line it'll always be in the majority. Meanwhile, the die-hard crowd gets ever more finely-divided (Dragonsfoot, for instance, will never accept 3.X, and Knights-and-Knaves Alehouse even refuses to countenance discussion of B/X and BECMI D&D...).

Quote from: WarthurThe problem I foresee is that as more and more editions exist, the die-hard crowd gets more and more fragmented.

cf Traveller.

A figgin' anthropomorphic shark with a friggin' laser attached. :haw:

Quote from: AlnagSett, I think you are reading too much in too little... they might not talk about 4e on purpose, because they are not allowed to talk about some parts of it, because it is still not out there. Because that's how their marketing goes.

I seriously doubt, they would design something they actually don't want to play and are not currently playing. What I expect though, is that the period when they become tired and bored with the system (as they currently are with 3E) will be shorter. And I mean significantly shorter.

My current view of 4E is that it indeed has deep gulp of "Ronnishness" in it. Which might not be as bad per se, but somehow I expect great yet short boom followed by quick disillusionment and than 5E. I feel somewhat alienated by this outcome already although I am going to try it anyway.

I agree with this message. This is all.

Quote from: DwightA figgin' anthropomorphic shark with a friggin' laser attached. :haw:

Shark Attack! Nooooooo!~!1!#)$)*($)#@* Don't put my brain on this track you bastard!!! :haw:

Bill (now thinking about sharks with friggn' lasers attached)

Quote from: DwightA figgin' anthropomorphic shark with a friggin' laser attached. :haw:

What's even funnier is Sett seeing the post count on his thread and eagerly clicking himself in, expecting all kinds of po-faced debate about how this "designer conspiracy" finally reveals the dark truth at the heart of 4E.