Someone took the effort (http://merricb.wordpress.com/2014/06/19/changes-from-the-dd-playtest-the-starter-set-fighter/) to list out the differences in the starter set fighter as opposed to the final playtest version. Interesting.
Mike Mearls has posted on twitter the full character sheet of one of the Starter Set fighters.
So, what has changed from the playtest? Here’s a list…
Proficiency Bonus: In the playtest it went from +1 to +6. In the full game, it starts at +2 (and presumably goes to +6). The change to +3 happens at level 5. (Previously levels 1-2 were +1, levels 3-6 were +2, and levels 7-10 were +3).
Personality Traits, Ideals, Bonds and Flaws: These additional pieces give you guides to role-play your character.
Second Wind: A first-level fighter now regains 1d10+level hit points rather than gaining 1d6+level temporary hit points.
Position of Privilege: The noble trait now allows you to secure an audience with a local noble rather than three followers.
Skills: Investigation replaces Search.
Passive Perception: Once again, Passive Perception is back (10 + Perception skill), replacing the need to make certain rolls.
XP changes: Level gains now occur at 300, 900, 2700 and 6500 XP rather than 250, 950, 2250 and 4750 XP
Tools: Playing cards are a tool, as opposed to “gaming set”.
Proficiencies: The Noble had History, Insight and Persuasion. Insight seems to have dropped off the list, as has Mounts (land) for the Fighter.
Land Speed and Chainmail: Although the Fighter is wearing chain mail, his speed is still 30 feet. It would have been 25 feet in the playtest. (The disadvantage with Stealth checks remains). --Note: this is because based on the screen shot of the equipment earlier, high STR negates speed penalty for armor
Hmm, Position of Privilege used to be a mechanic that gave you followers, now let's you get an audience with a noble. I don't like the precedent of the "powers for Roleplaying". Too much game system fingers on the setting.
This is exactly the kind of thing WotC always does. They don't even realize that including this as a power on a base character, what they are saying is the implied assumption of the game is a high medieval nobility with Mallory like courtesy. It sets the tone and now puts the GM on the defensive because he has to explain the reality of his setting, and he's still going to look like a dick. I was hoping I could away with not doing a total explode and rebuild on the starter set. Starting to think I was wrong.
Eh, if your world doesn't have nobles of that style, ban that background from your game. It's no different than banning clerics in a game world with no gods.
That seems to be an overreaction. They seem to be going for the obvious to you and myself but not so when I actually started gaming seriously. I for one bitched on and on for these kind of roleplay aids until 2006 with MtAw. I flat out don't have your years and years of experience yet I'm no newbie.
Fuck your strawmanning bullshit. If you don't like it ban the background or change it back already.
OTOH I don't like the change to Second Wind. Damn backdoor 4e stuff AGAIN!
Quote from: Emperor Norton;759987Eh, if your world doesn't have nobles of that style, ban that background from your game. It's no different than banning clerics in a game world with no gods.
Sigh, Rule Zero. I realize I can do whatever I wish, but telling a GM "this player gets an audience with any local noble" is not setting the best example for a GM for a Starter Set, don't you think? Honestly?
Quote from: Marleycat;759988Fuck your strawmanning bullshit. If you don't like it ban the background or change it back already.
Words have definitions, it helps to know them before use.
Quote from: Marleycat;759988OTOH I don't like the change to Second Wind. Damn backdoor 4e stuff AGAIN!
That's an overreaction, just change it if you don't like it.
See what a completely useless argument that is?
A background by definition is gonna tie into the campaign setting, so... yeah, I think you'd have to adjust them as needed. *shrug*
Having an allowed and banned list of backgrounds for a campaign setting isn't rule 0.
Its not rule 0 when Dark Sun say there are no Clerics. There are just no Clerics. Its a function of the Campaign setting.
Just like I don't expect every race to be in every campaign, I don't expect every background to be in every campaign. It has to fit the roleplaying premise of the campaign world.
Quote from: CRKrueger;759991Words have definitions, it helps to know them before use.
That's an overreaction, just change it if you don't like it.
See what a completely useless argument that is?
No. Given one is background and the other is a RULE (which like said background is easily altered) and in the case of long/short rests the developers already said there is no fixed time. It's up to individual games. As for healing? Seriously? You know that can be altered even without the DMG. And backgrounds are optional and easily changed. Or just not appropriate to the setting you're running.
Quote from: Emperor Norton;759996Having an allowed and banned list of backgrounds for a campaign setting isn't rule 0.
Its not rule 0 when Dark Sun say there are no Clerics. There are just no Clerics. Its a function of the Campaign setting.
Just like I don't expect every race to be in every campaign, I don't expect every background to be in every campaign. It has to fit the roleplaying premise of the campaign world.
Yeah, but this isn't Dark Sun, Planescape or Spelljammer, this is the Starter Set, where we tell Mr. Newbie GM "Any noble in your game must give this character an audience." Seriously? We're doing the genre metagame thing right out of the gate? Was that really necessary?
Was "This character is nobility. NPCs will treat him with the level of respect their culture gives those of noble blood." so fucking hard?
Quote from: Marleycat;759998No. Given one is background and the other is a RULE (which like said background is easily altered) and in the case of long/short rests the developers already said there is no fixed time. It's up to individual games. As for healing? Seriously? You know that can be altered even without the DMG. And backgrounds are optional and easily changed. Or just not appropriate to the setting you're running.
Umm, are you aware you just invalidated your argument?
Quote from: CRKrueger;760000Yeah, but this isn't Dark Sun, Planescape or Spelljammer, this is the Starter Set, where we tell Mr. Newbie GM "Any noble in your game must give this character an audience." Seriously? We're doing the genre metagame thing right out of the gate? Was that really necessary?
Was "This character is nobility. NPCs will treat him with the level of respect their culture gives those of noble blood." so fucking hard?
No but that isn't the point.
Quote from: Marleycat;760005No but that isn't the point.
The point is what, making a criticism you don't agree with is verboten? That's the point of all these threads, isn't it.
Quote from: CRKrueger;760004Umm, are you aware you just invalidated your argument?
No. Because you're literally complaining about an option. The starter set is including some options (backgrounds, traits, flaws, bonds...) on purpose as handholds for beginners. They flat out said as much already. I don't agree with it but I understand the why of it.
Quote from: Marleycat;760008No. Because you're literally complaining about an option. The starter set is including some options (backgrounds, traits, flaws, bonds...) on purpose as handholds for beginners. They flat out said as much already.
And you're different of course because you're complaining about a rule? Funny, when I complained about a rule, At-will cantrips, you said the same exact thing, what a surprise.
Your opinion or one you agree with is the only one with any validity ever, got it.
Can you just sig when you're in the mood to post with your brain turned off, kind of getting sick of wasting my time.
Quote from: CRKrueger;760010And you're different of course because you're complaining about a rule? Funny, when I complained about a rule, At-will cantrips, you said the same exact thing, what a surprise.
Your opinion or one you agree with is the only one with any validity ever, got it.
Can you just sig when you're in the mood to post with your brain turned off, kind of getting sick of wasting my time.
You are complaining about stuff even I can change in 30 seconds and have already posted. This without the game or the DMG. It's old already get it? Only if you'd quit "wasting" your time there wouldn't be an issue.
This whole site is built on the mantra fuck the numbers its about the player and you go batshit because 5e is going for a toolkit type game? Ridiculous.
Now if you have an issue when the actual rules come out with BASIC then you have ground to stand on and something to alter if it's not to your preference just like myself.
Yes, yes we all know by now why my criticisms are "inappropriate". Tell me this...
Why was your complaining about 4e mechanics backdooring their way in worthy of comment?
Quote from: CRKrueger;760022Yes, yes we all know by now why my criticisms are "inappropriate". Tell me this...
Why was your complaining about 4e mechanics backdooring their way in worthy of comment?
4e never made sense at least as a RPG. It's basically a boardgame. Everything balanced, everyone with powers, everyone with the same number of slots like some bad version of prior edition wizards/sorcerers. Push this, pull that... what am I playing? Chutes and Ladders?
I know that 4e is in 5e but please don't make it so obvious. The healing is pure 4e to me and will be altered the second I run a game as will the short/long rest mechanism(that in itself may fix the healing issue) . And as soon as the DMG is out hitpoints also and the baseline of the game itself. I do it for FantasyCraft and now I will do it for a current Dnd. Mulilate, spindle, and fold is my motto. But this time with modern rules unlike 2e.
My current favorite short/long rest is 1 hour for a short rest and two days in an inn or something similar for a long rest. None of this overnight heal to full without outside help bullshit.
We should really stop arguing amongst ourselves. Yesterday I posted my b/x version of 5e character sheet to the G+ Next group (https://plus.google.com/u/0/108732130417970678019/posts/AdFchJ38Dvf), and the people we should be arguing with are guys like Andrew ;)
Compared to people like that, and our differences are pretty darn minor. Sort of a minor epiphany I had lol
Quote from: Sacrosanct;760085We should really stop arguing amongst ourselves. Yesterday I posted my b/x version of 5e character sheet to the G+ Next group (https://plus.google.com/u/0/108732130417970678019/posts/AdFchJ38Dvf), and the people we should be arguing with are guys like Andrew ;)
Compared to people like that, and our differences are pretty darn minor. Sort of a minor epiphany I had lol
Those comments are great especially about the nods to 2e. That Andrew guy had to be trolling for the lolz.
How do you find and join these groups?
Quote from: Marleycat;760092Those comments are great especially about the nods to 2e. That Andrew guy had to be trolling for the lolz.
How do you find and join these groups?
Have a google account. Go to groups. Search for whatever suits your fancy, and join them
Quote from: Sacrosanct;760093Have a google account. Go to groups. Search for whatever suits your fancy, and join them
Cool.
Edit: There's loads of information there!!!
Just because the "Noble" PC can secure an audience doesn't mean they have the ruler's ear. And some nobles might use the audience to their own advantage. I don't feel thus background presents much of a problem, honestly. The comments over healing here lead to me to think (again) that some sort of differentiation between structural damage and "plot damage" is sorely needed in D&D. Hell, why can't HP's just be Fate Points? As you gain experience, you're better at avoiding those big shots. Certainly characters don't get that much more buff.
Quote from: Marleycat;760095Cool.
Edit: There's loads of information there!!!
There are a ton of groups there.
Quote from: dragoner;760108There are a ton of groups there.
I know, I joined a couple Dnd ones, Onyx Path, Walking Dead, Hunger Games, Seattle Seahawks and a person or two I like.
Quote from: Marleycat;760110I know, I joined a couple Dnd ones, Onyx Path, Walking Dead, Hunger Games, Seattle Seahawks and a person or two I like.
Some, like the OSR one, are just filled with people spamming for their blogs; which I guess it gets the google feedcatcher there, but not too active otherwise. I think for forum software, it leaves a bit to be desired, vbulletin is good like here, G+ can get to be a pain if there are too many people posting in a thread.
Quote from: dragoner;760115Some, like the OSR one, are just filled with people spamming for their blogs; which I guess it gets the google feedcatcher there, but not too active otherwise. I think for forum software, it leaves a bit to be desired, vbulletin is good like here, G+ can get to be a pain if there are too many people posting in a thread.
Looks like it because it's all imbedded. What I like about it is it lets my upload/download PDF's and things directly if I am using my phone instead of a computer.
Quote from: Marleycat;760116Looks like it because it's all imbedded. What I like about it is it lets my upload/download PDF's and things directly if I am using my phone instead of a computer.
Yeah, it does have some good features, though be careful of posting from the notification pane on the side, because I have had my cursor move off the pane and then lose what I had written there, kind of annoying. Probably my most major annoyance, esp if a thread gets active.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;760085We should really stop arguing amongst ourselves. Yesterday I posted my b/x version of 5e character sheet to the G+ Next group (https://plus.google.com/u/0/108732130417970678019/posts/AdFchJ38Dvf), and the people we should be arguing with are guys like Andrew ;)
Compared to people like that, and our differences are pretty darn minor. Sort of a minor epiphany I had lol
Andrew's sarcastically going hard, but, to be honest, he does have a point. If 5e is trying to appeal to everyone, it was inevitable that they would appeal to the story crowd. I'm just surprised they are doing it from page 1.
However, it makes perfect sense to be honest.
1.) Old school people - give them the Basic set to shut them up the fuck up for once, any book or module they buy is gravy.
2.) 3,3.5,PF people - give them books full of crunch to buy, we know how to do that, we perfected it.
3.) Story guys - hmm. We know they're probably not going to buy a 60.00 hardcover from the Great Unwashed Satan in order to get the story mechanics. So, we have to lay the foundation in the free stuff so they see we're thinking about them. Then we can sell them the $60 hardcover to get the mechanics to make all the story stats work.
Frankly, it shows me someone over at WotC might have found an intern with a brain for the RPG side.
Quote from: CRKrueger;759984Hmm, Position of Privilege used to be a mechanic that gave you followers, now let's you get an audience with a noble. I don't like the precedent of the "powers for Roleplaying". Too much game system fingers on the setting.
I can see your point and I have already stated I find other background noise on that sheet to be more egregious.
But if I had to guess at a reason for this change I would wager on a lack of follower rules in the starter set, PDF, or both.
Quote from: MonsterSlayer;760139I can see your point and I have already stated I find other background noise on that sheet to be more egregious.
But if I had to guess at a reason for this change I would wager on a lack of follower rules in the starter set, PDF, or both.
This and they figure 1 guy with 4 things to run might be too complex for a rank beginner among other obvious reasons any experienced gamer could come up with and understand the reasons behind the decision. They don't have to agree, but just understand the logic behind the decision.
Quote from: Marleycat;760144This and they figure 1 guy with 4 things to run might be too complex for a rank beginner among other obvious reasons any experienced gamer could come up with and understand the reasons behind the decision. They don't have to agree just understand the logic.
I understand the logic all right, anything Marley wants to bitch about she does and it's all good, anything Marley doesn't want anyone else to bitch about because she likes it, she comes up with whatever reason happens to pop into her head at the time why it's an invalid complaint as opposed to her responses.
Do you understand the logic, however, that not everyone on earth agrees with you and some people might think a Starter Set aimed at new GMs shouldn't start out with player powers that tell the GM how to run his setting?
Quote from: CRKrueger;760145Do you understand the logic, however, that not everyone on earth agrees with you and some people might think a Starter Set aimed at new GMs shouldn't start out with player powers that tell the GM how to run his setting?
I think I understand the logic, but I think you're assuming too much is undefined in this starter set--this is very specifically a location in the Forgotten Realms, with a lot of setting definition already packed in. That might not be the best training for new DMs (at least, if you subscribe to the philosophies of the Viking Hat, Homebrew Is Superior, and Learning Through Death ;) ), but the Starter Set is very much designed as a 'pick up and play' experience that hands a bunch of this stuff to the DM to start with. Creating a milieu from the ground up will probably be a topic for the DMG--Basic's intended for people who either already know the game or who want to play the preset adventures/settings, from everything I can tell.
And I'll bet you it's not as annoying to you as the Relativistic/Balanced-Focused Symbiotic Henotheism baked into the cleric class for the past twenty-five years is to me. :D
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;760147And I'll bet you it's not as annoying to you as the Relativistic/Balanced-Focused Subjectivist Henotheism baked into the cleric class for the past twenty-five years is to me. :D
You got me there.
H
Quote from: CRKrueger;760145I understand the logic all right, anything Marley wants to bitch about she does and it's all good, anything Marley doesn't want anyone else to bitch about because she likes it, she comes up with whatever reason happens to pop into her head at the time why it's an invalid complaint as opposed to her responses.
Do you understand the logic, however, that not everyone on earth agrees with you and some people might think a Starter Set aimed at new GMs shouldn't start out with player powers that tell the GM how to run his setting?
Glad you accept it's Marley's World and you just live in it.:p
You know I understand and actually agree with you right? But at the same time understand and accept the logic for their decision.
Why? Because it's not aimed at me and if I were to use it I would walk my daughter through it with chargen and the rest. Who it's aimed to has no clue about what the heck you're talking about though.
Setting? What?
Also given I'm a Mage GM that by some definitions that means I am a storygame person!!
Quote from: Marleycat;760150You know I understand and actually agree with you right?
Kind of hard to figure that out when instead of responding with...
Quote from: Marleycat;760150You know I understand and actually agree with you right? But at the same time understand and accept the logic for their decision. Why? Because it's not aimed at me and if I were to use it I would walk my daughter through it with chargen and the rest. Who it's aimed to has no clue about what the heck you're talking about.
You respond
initially with...
Quote from: Marleycat;759988That seems to be an overreaction.
...and...
Quote from: Marleycat;759988Fuck your strawmanning bullshit.
Kind of hard to reconcile someone who actually believed the first one responding with the second one.
Quote from: CRKrueger;760152Kind of hard to figure that out when instead of responding with...
You respond initially with...
...and...
Kind of hard to reconcile someone who actually believed the first one responding with the second one.
You get off on some hardcore tangent and it just gets me nuts because I know what you intend but it comes out way too hardline.
You tend to look at things from the hardcore RPG player view not from the casual (me) or the rank beginner point of view. You know, the target audience of 5e?
Dnd is just a gateway game and to be that it must be inclusive not exclusive like the OSR or the like.
Base assumptions matter. It what contributes to the culture around a game.
When 3e launched, Monte Cook did not envision all the options being taken for hard rules.
When WotC decided to start moving away from the OGL, they started splatting the hell out of 3.e and made none of the splats OGL, then when that wasn't enough "brand protection" for Hasbro, they came out with 3.5, and in order to invalidate the existing OGL content, they came out with a much more detailed and crunchy version, and came out with all new versions of splat and allowed everything in organized play. The default assumption was, "everything is permitted, officially". As we know, that didn't work out too well if you're not a charop maniac.
Butterfly effect. Things have consequences. Of course anything WotC does, I can change, I've been doing that since Moldvay.
However, when they decide to make something like at-will cantrips part of the foundation of the game, they are making an assumption: that assumption is that a magic-user is supposed to always be contributing to damage output.
Forget that it's changing the nature of the class further away from its resource management roots.
It's also changing the group dynamic from earlier versions.
Now, you might think...
1. You like that the Wizard is less about resource management.
...or...
2. You like that the Wizard can always contribute to combat through magic.
But you can't tell me that doesn't change the class from it's Magic-User roots. It does, and the change is fundamental.
Now, whether this is going to be one of those Butterfly Effect points it's too early to tell, but again we didn't start with LFQW in 1e, but we did end up with it in 3.5. Why? A whole lot of little changes that together ended up being greater then the sum of their parts.
Based on past performance, I don't think WotC applies the same rigour to it's rpg mechanics with regards to synergies and unintended consequences that it obviously does with Magic.
Calling me a hardcore RPGer, I guess, I dunno. If I'm interested in something I put thought into it. If I'm not, I don't. I don't really give any authority to Gary. I think he's vastly over-maligned, but I had a ton of fun with his game systems, but I changed stuff in all of them (and yeah I played Cyborg Commando).
I'm not anti-5e because it isn't old school enough, I'm pointing out things I like and don't like, same as anyone. Because you happen to disagree with some of them is just life on earth.
A
Quote from: CRKrueger;760162Base assumptions matter. It what contributes to the culture around a game.
When 3e launched, Monte Cook did not envision all the options being taken for hard rules.
When WotC decided to start moving away from the OGL, they started splatting the hell out of 3.e and made none of the splats OGL, then when that wasn't enough "brand protection" for Hasbro, they came out with 3.5, and in order to invalidate the existing OGL content, they came out with a much more detailed and crunchy version, and came out with all new versions of splat and allowed everything in organized play. The default assumption was, "everything is permitted, officially". As we know, that didn't work out too well if you're not a charop maniac.
Butterfly effect. Things have consequences. Of course anything WotC does, I can change, I've been doing that since Moldvay.
However, when they decide to make something like at-will cantrips part of the foundation of the game, they are making an assumption: that assumption is that a magic-user is supposed to always be contributing to damage output.
Forget that it's changing the nature of the class further away from its resource management roots.
It's also changing the group dynamic from earlier versions.
Now, you might think...
1. You like that the Wizard is less about resource management.
...or...
2. You like that the Wizard can always contribute to combat through magic.
But you can't tell me that doesn't change the class from it's Magic-User roots. It does, and the change is fundamental.
Now, whether this is going to be one of those Butterfly Effect points it's too early to tell, but again we didn't start with LFQW in 1e, but we did end up with it in 3.5. Why? A whole lot of little changes that together ended up being greater then the sum of their parts.
Based on past performance, I don't think WotC applies the same rigour to it's rpg mechanics with regards to synergies and unintended consequences that it obviously does with Magic.
Calling me a hardcore RPGer, I guess, I dunno. If I'm interested in something I put thought into it. If I'm not, I don't. I don't really give any authority to Gary. I think he's vastly over-maligned, but I had a ton of fun with his game systems, but I changed stuff in all of them (and yeah I played Cyborg Commando).
I'm not anti-5e because it isn't old school enough, I'm pointing out things I like and don't like, same as anyone. Because you happen to disagree with some of them is just life on earth.
I'm just posting to let you know I read this. But to actually respond in a logical manner on a 3G phone? Not happening. I might when I'm on a computer...like it matters or you'd actually get the point, but I will probably do it for you because you're not actually a hater despite working so hard to look the part.
Because currently all it looks like to me (a person that hasn't bought a thing from WotC since 3.0 is BUTTHURT). Basically read the PDF and play it or say fuck you. Really how hard is that? You already know we envision Dnd differently let alone prefer wholly different games outside of Dnd. So why the histrionics?
Quote from: Marleycat;760168Basically read the PDF and play it or say fuck you. Really how hard is that?
It's not hard at all, but this is a board where people come to post about games. Basically what you're saying is no one should post anything about 5e until we actually read it. Well, we all know you
don't actually believe that, since you're posting like crazy about anything you see that
you like.
So what it comes to is "Marley doesn't want to hear it, fingers in her ears, nyah, nyah, nyah, stop it," You don't see anything people have to say, put them on ignore, that's what it's there for after all.
Quote from: Marleycat;760168Because currently all it looks like to me (a person that hasn't bought a thing from WotC since 3.0 is BUTTHURT.
If that's really all you see, then sorry you have such a dim view of my opinion or intelligence. But, that's ok, because if that is all you see, then I can tell my opinion of your intelligence was
vastly overrated.
Thanks, for finally proving what I've been suspecting for a bit, that there is actually no point to actually reading any of your posts here about 5e.
BTW, you have been buying WotC content, just a lot of it has been repackaged as FantasyCraft. :D
Quote from: CRKrueger;760169It's not hard at all, but this is a board where people come to post about games. Basically what you're saying is no one should post anything about 5e until we actually read it. Well, we all know you don't actually believe that, since you're posting like crazy about anything you see that you like.
So what it comes to is "Marley doesn't want to hear it, fingers in her ears, nyah, nyah, nyah, stop it," You don't see anything people have to say, put them on ignore, that's what it's there for after all.
If that's really all you see, then sorry you have such a dim view of my opinion or intelligence. But, that's ok, because if that is all you see, then I can tell my opinion of your intelligence was vastly overrated.
Thanks, for finally proving what I've been suspecting for a bit, that there is actually no point to actually reading any of your posts here about 5e.YOU
BTW, you have been buying WotC content, just a lot of it has been repackaged as FantasyCraft. :D
You got me on FantasyCraft.:)
Dammit!!!!
And as I already said there is no reason to read your posts concerning 5e. See how simple that was? Just look up Windjammer's sig and you MIGHT actually get it....I believe you will.;)
Here's a hint DON'T respond with bullshit given NOBODY actually knows the real rules. Or was that too obscure? Let's not even get into what the PHB/DMG actually mean to any experienced player or DM.
Quote from: Marleycat;760150H
Why? Because it's not aimed at me and if I were to use it I would walk my daughter through it with chargen and the rest. Who it's aimed to has no clue about what the heck you're talking about though.
You know I've seen you make this argument a couple of times/ a couple of ways. I know you are basing it on Pundits statements and a tweet from Mike Mearls.
But from a business perspective, it's a cap argument someone makes to cover their butt from a massive marketing screw up.
Of course it is aimed at you, and me, and everyone on this site. There is no way they sat there and said let's roll out the latest edition of our flag ship RPG, but we don't want to make a product that will appeal to the already baked in fan base.
Let's instead make a product that appeals to this ambiguous non quantifiable section of the public that has never played an RPG.
That doesn't happen in the real business world. Of course it is aimed at you.
Quote from: MonsterSlayer;760171You know I've seen you make this argument a couple of times/ a couple of ways. I know you are basing it on Pundits statements and a tweet from Mike Mearls.
But from a business perspective, it's a cap argument someone makes to cover their butt from a massive marketing screw up.
Of course it is aimed at you, and me, and everyone on this site. There is no way they sat there and said let's roll out the latest edition of our flag ship RPG, but we don't want to make a product that will appeal to the already baked in fan base.
Let's instead make a product that appeals to this ambiguous non quantifiable section of the public that has never played an RPG.
That doesn't happen in the real business world. Of course it is aimed at you.
You're not grasping it. As just a typical Mom it does grab my attention if it's at Walmart or Target. As an experienced gamer I laugh because I or my daughter aren't the audience, neither of us need it.
For my extended circle of non-gamers? Whole different story. Again I would have done it differently but it is what it is and will work just fine anyway. Trust me on this.
BASIC is for YOU. While the PHB/DMG is for ME. Remember which Dnd I actually played and which games I play currently.
The Starter Set is for just who it says, starters. Not beginners, they're actually 2 different groups of people.
Quote from: MonsterSlayer;760171You know I've seen you make this argument a couple of times/ a couple of ways. I know you are basing it on Pundits statements and a tweet from Mike Mearls.
But from a business perspective, it's a cap argument someone makes to cover their butt from a massive marketing screw up.
Of course it is aimed at you, and me, and everyone on this site. There is no way they sat there and said let's roll out the latest edition of our flag ship RPG, but we don't want to make a product that will appeal to the already baked in fan base.
Let's instead make a product that appeals to this ambiguous non quantifiable section of the public that has never played an RPG.
That doesn't happen in the real business world. Of course it is aimed at you.
Companies never make products aimed at expanding their market? WotC recently published a boardgame called Lords of Waterdeep. It's a eurogame design, but a very, very basic one. Most of the experienced boardgame hobbyists I know think it's crap. But it has been tremendously popular, drawing in loads of geeks who are new to the boardgaming hobby. Even though I'm a boardgame hobbyists, Lords of Waterdeep isn't targetted at me. It's too derivative, too shallow. But since there are 10 casual boardgaming newbies out there for every hardcore boardgamer like me, I doubt WotC cares that I don't have a copy on my shelf.
Quote from: Haffrung;760174Companies never make products aimed at expanding their market? WotC recently published a boardgame called Lords of Waterdeep. It's a eurogame design, but a very, very basic one. Most of the experienced boardgame hobbyists I know think it's crap. But it has been tremendously popular, drawing in loads of geeks who are new to the boardgaming hobby. Even though I'm a boardgame hobbyists, Lords of Waterdeep isn't targetted at me. It's too derivative, too shallow. But since there are 10 casual boardgaming newbies out there for every hardcore boardgamer like me, I doubt WotC cares that I don't have a copy on my shelf.
Of course companies try to expand their markets. But did they roll out Lords of Waterdeep as the first product in the 4E line up? That was the argument. No they released it as property tie in at the end of the 4e publishing cyle. They were trying to slap the DnD name on a game and sell a few copies to folks that play Dominion and Settlers of Catan like we occasionally do.
And again, it was targeted at you.... As you yourself claim, the game was shallow and derivative but they knew the could sell some units if they slap the DnD name on it. They weren't targeting that game at 12 year olds that were just looking for something to spend their allowance on. They were targeting at you, you just didn't bite because I'm pretty sure you have heard of DnD before.
Quote from: CRKrueger;760162Based on past performance, I don't think WotC applies the same rigour to it's rpg mechanics with regards to synergies and unintended consequences that it obviously does with Magic.
Magic: The Gathering veteran here. As much as I admire the brilliant things the design teams have done over time, The history of that game is ALL ABOUT unintended consequences. I can list dozens of recent examples (past four years) of serious oversights resulting in messed up metagames and certainly driving some newbies away. Yet the game thrives.
No denying the Magic team is more substantial than the D&D team, but D&D is supposed to be a fuzzier ruleset anyway, right? I'll certainly never forget the years of wailing over when D&D tried to be as rigorous as M:TG.
Quote from: Marleycat;760173The Starter Set is for just who it says, starters. Not beginners, they're actually 2 different groups of people.
Marley, I think I get where you are coming from but I don't think you are hearing me... but before I derail this thread more than I should politely have done so.
What is the difference between starter and beginner?
Quote from: MonsterSlayer;760184Marley, I think I get where you are coming from but I don't think you are hearing me... but before I derail this thread more than I should politely have done so.
What is the difference between starter and beginner?
Ok, a beginner is like me or my daughter. I went to a game because I was invited by my "besty" I didn't actually care about the game but I care about her. So I participated but with lots of hand holding for 3-4 sessions. Until I made the decision that it was fun and cool to spread my wings and make the game match my imagination.
A beginner goes in cold just off the game itself. No hand holding beyond what the game itself provides. Hand holding is a bad definition actually a better word and definition is FRAMEWORK.
Quote from: Marleycat;760188Ok, a beginner is like me or my daughter. I went to a game because I was invited by my "besty" I didn't actually care about the game but I care about her. So I participated but with lots of hand holding for 3-4 sessions. Until I made the decision that it was fun and cool to spread my wings and make the game match my imagination.
A beginner goes in cold just off the game itself. No hand holding beyond what the game itself provides. Hand holding is a bad definition actually a better word and definition is FRAMEWORK.
What? You didn't even address the "starter" in your difference between "starter and beginner". I think whatever the answer is in your mind, you are splitting serious hairs when it comes to the grand marketing plan of a multi million dollar corp. like WotC (and especially Hasbro).
Point blank, if you have heard of DnD, they would like you to buy every product they put the DnD logo on. I don't care if it is a lunch Box, lego rip off, or a starter set.
Quote from: MonsterSlayer;760193What? You didn't even address the "starter" in your difference between "starter and beginner". I think whatever the answer is in your mind, you are splitting serious hairs when it comes to the grand marketing plan of a multi million dollar corp. like WotC (and especially Hasbro).
Point blank, if you have heard of DnD, they would like you to buy every product they put the DnD logo on. I don't care if it is a lunch Box, lego rip off, or a starter set.
What are you? My second paragraph meant STARTER unless you like to phone post piss off. I just didn't catch it in my edits. Now I completely understand why TTRP is dying I mean you're actually serious.... sad very sad.
Oh yeah sorry WotC touched you in a bad place boy. Grow up already. POINT BLANK.
You asked for an explanation so you are required to listen to my full and actual explanation without jumping to conclusions without it agreed? Or should I edit it to prove your overreaction?
Seriously just replace beginner with starter in the topic sentence and you will actually see my explanation just as you requested.
Quote from: Marleycat;760008No. Because you're literally complaining about an option. The starter set is including some options (backgrounds, traits, flaws, bonds...) on purpose as handholds for beginners. They flat out said as much already. I don't agree with it but I understand the why of it.
The starter set is including some options (backgrounds, traits, flaws, bonds...) on purpose as handholds for beginners.
That is golden. Pure wonder in a cup.
I agree. I think that there are people who need these types of markers or signposts to help them. I like the quote above because it suggests to me that there are is a trend in gaming that accommodates those who find it difficult at times to roleplay.
MonsterSlayer, what the fuck is wrong with you? Why the hell won't you just pledge eternal allegiance to a game you haven't read and that isn't published yet?
If you wait until you actually play 5e to have an informed opinion, you won't ever be blessed as a true believer...and RPGPundit and his most holy priestess Marleycat will know the weakness of your soul.
Quote from: Marleycat;7600264e never made sense at least as a RPG. It's basically a boardgame.
Aw...how cute!
O
Quote from: BarefootGaijin;760198The starter set is including some options (backgrounds, traits, flaws, bonds...) on purpose as handholds for beginners.
That is golden. Pure wonder in a cup.
I agree. I think that there are people who need these types of markers or signposts to help them. I like the quote above because it suggests to me that there are is a trend in gaming that accommodates those who find it difficult at times to roleplay.
Who knows? Do you?
Convienently you ignore the actual meaning of my post. I did say I actually disagree with the approach but my bad I figured you actually read the whole post? Rather then troll?
Quote from: Spinachcat;760199MonsterSlayer, what the fuck is wrong with you? Why the hell won't you just pledge eternal allegiance to a game you haven't read and that isn't published yet?
If you wait until you actually play 5e to have an informed opinion, you won't ever be blessed as a true believer...and RPGPundit and his most holy priestess Marleycat will know the weakness of your soul.
Aw...how cute!
Yep. Given it's better to ACTUALLY know the real rules before being a bitch about things that might not even be there or easily modified if you give a damn. If not just play other games. What none of you are getting is that I ALREADY have my primary games. 5e is basically an excuse to replace FantasyCraft for me and my players. If not no loss.
In otherwords it has me interested in Dnd again after 8-10 years of completely ignoring it.
Quote from: Marleycat;760197What are you? My second paragraph meant STARTER unless you like to phone post piss off. I just didn't catch it in my edits. Now I completely understand why TTRP is dying I mean you're actually serious.... sad very sad.
Oh yeah sorry WotC touched you in a bad place boy. Grow up already. POINT BLANK.
You asked for an explanation so you are required to listen to my full and actual explanation without jumping to conclusions without it agreed? Or should I edit it to prove your overreaction?
Seriously just replace beginner with starter in the topic sentence and you will actually see my explanation just as you requested.
Wow I'm pissed off?
I came to this thread because i was bored and I'm waiting for some deli ions cake to cool off.
I thought hey, I'm actually interested in the differences between the character sheet and the final play test.
I might actually buy the starter set because despite the lousy marketing, I might be interested in a new campaign and a look at the new rules.
But instead I'm derailed by arguments that:
A) this product isn't aimed at me and they don't want my $12 because I'm neither a starter or a beginner.
B) It is pointless to care about something that is going to change by the time the final product comes out
And all of this from someone that seems perfectly happy playing Fantasy Craft.
Excuse me for trying to reconcile all of your arguments for why we shouldn't be discussing 5e but I had nothing better to do but try to twist my brain like a pretzel.
carry on.
Quote from: MonsterSlayer;760203Wow I'm pissed off?
I came to this thread because i was bored and I'm waiting for some deli ions cake to cool off.
I thought hey, I'm actually interested in the differences between the character sheet and the final play test.
I might actually buy the starter set because despite the lousy marketing, I might be interested in a new campaign and a look at the new rules.
But instead I'm derailed by arguments that:
A) this product isn't aimed at me and they don't want my $12 because I'm neither a starter or a beginner.
B) It is pointless to care about something that is going to change by the time the final product comes out
And all of this from someone that seems perfectly happy playing Fantasy Craft.
Excuse me for trying to reconcile all of your arguments for why we shouldn't be discussing 5e but I had nothing better to do but try to twist my brain like a pretzel.
carry on.
Nope not pissed. You don't actually want to understand. If you'd like me to replace that one word I will. But like most you're trolling because we have jack for real information. But you're actually right I am bored because football season isn't until August. But this entertains me somewhat....at least a little.
Keep up I am looking at 5e as my Dnd fix not my actual primary game or passion.:)
I'm a casual gamer but will buy product of games I play. Get it? PLAY. My actual passions are baseball and football. I get serious there.
My moniker isn't a joke by the way.;)
Quote from: Marleycat;760205Nope not pissed. You don't actually want to understand. If you'd like me to replace that one word I will. But like most you're trolling because we have jack for real information. But you're actually right I am bored because football season isn't until August. But this entertains me somewhat....at least a little.
Keep up I am looking at 5e as my Dnd fix not my actual primary game or passion.:)
I'm a casual gamer but will buy product of games I play. Get it? PLAY. My actual passions are baseball and football. I get serious there.
I
So the very first post I make in this thread you agree with. But then you make the "bad wrong fun" argument of Internet bulletin board use because we are speculating about a game that isn't released yet?
And I'm trolling?
Anyhow tasty cake is done and we all await on baited breathe for both 5e and football season to get here as soon as possible.
Good night
Quote from: MonsterSlayer;760208So the very first post I make in this thread you agree with. But then you make the "bad wrong fun" argument of Internet bulletin board use because we are speculating about a game that isn't released yet?
And I'm trolling?
Anyhow tasty cake is done and we all await on baited breathe for both 5e and football season to get here as soon as possible.
Good night
Meh. You ask for an explanation yet go full retard on an obvious missed edit of one word that you knew was misplaced? I'd understand if it actually changed the meaning or context. Just for that stupidity I think I'll pop in from time to time this Fall/Winter just to liven the joint up.If I have time that is.:)
Quote from: Marleycat;760201O
Who knows? Do you?
Convienently you ignore the actual meaning of my post. I did say I actually disagree with the approach but my bad I figured you actually read the whole post? Rather then troll?
Let me get this straight: I agree with you that there are aspects of the fighters character sheet that allow for newbie hand holding. Maybe they should be there, maybe not. Maybe they are evidence of the content of the wider game. Maybe not.
Then you get pissy and throw troll accusations around. Here's a suggestion: Call the fucking waaaahmublance and take those hurt feels to tumblr. Seriously. Have a dose of "fuck off" while your about it too.
Quote from: Marleycat;760205My actual passions are baseball and football. I get serious there.
As a Cubs and Rays fan, I am DYING for the new D&D to get here.
As for the starter set, shoot -- I'm buying that damned thing just for the maps. If the campaign looks cool, I'll run it, but am likely to wait for the free pdf to kick up the next campaign.
Quote from: BarefootGaijin;760220Let me get this straight: I agree with you that there are aspects of the fighters character sheet that allow for newbie hand holding. Maybe they should be there, maybe not. Maybe they are evidence of the content of the wider game. Maybe not.
Then you get pissy and throw troll accusations around. Here's a suggestion: Call the fucking waaaahmublance and take those hurt feels to tumblr. Seriously. Have a dose of "fuck off" while your about it too.
Did I hurt your feels?