...the answer to a whole lot of unasked questions.
This is why it falls short for me. Maybe there needed to be a revision, rules culling or even a new edition. I don't think the latter was necessary, but when 4e was announced I had more hope than cynicism.
I'm really late to complaining about it, but it's finally reached boiling point for me.
Here's what's wrong with it in my estimation:
Every single rule that moves away from immersion. 3e got this right, and even 2e did. Now we have characters that do things because the rules need someone who can do that thing. Spellcasters are the opposite of interesting.
It just strikes me as an edition that was purely based on killing OGL material. It didn't work in my estimation, but it's nevertheless a bad reason to make a new edition. The higher-ups wanted a new edition as different from the older editions as possible designed to sell secondary services and products like minis, and the writers churned it out. I don't think it was designed to be a good game, so much as a good marketing vehicle.
Even I don't care any more, and I could edition-war at Olympic level.
People who are rusted on to 4e will not be dissuaded, people who dislike it are firm in their opinions, and the ones in the middle who may have been persuaded either way have been so deluged with opinion that they've either picked a side already or decided to ignore the wars and decide for themselves.
4e split the market very efficiently, so criticising it in comparison to other editions these days is like criticising basketball for being a bad edition of water polo.
For what it's worth, I don't like any version of D&D very much.
Same here. I had high hopes for 4th Ed when they said they were culling the skill list.
They culled the skill list allright but they made a mess out of that second wind crap.
Quote from: Hairfoot;4271984e split the market very efficiently, so criticising it in comparison to other editions these days is like criticising basketball for being a bad edition of water polo.
My feeling as well. Mind you, I don't feel I have enough actual-play experience with 4e to issue a definitive judgement. But it does feel so wildly dissimilar to all previous editions.
I suspect the Essentials line might have been a last-ditch attempt to bring the reluctant into the fold. The class writeups do feel a lot closer to what I consider "baseline" D&D.
Quote from: Hairfoot;4271984e split the market very efficiently, so criticising it in comparison to other editions these days is like criticising basketball for being a bad edition of water polo.
I think that's the real problem with 4e, it is basketball when all the previous versions had been water polo.
GOOD GOD, MAN! My Time Machine works! It IS 2008!
What? :D
I pondered your question thoroughly and came up with a comprehensive list of the failings of 4E. I ran them through some highly sophisticated algorithms and, remembering what one of my old university professors taught me, came up with a distilled and concise conclusion.
It's shyte.
(http://www.automopedia.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/steam-time-machine.JPG)
Quote from: The Butcher;427210I suspect the Essentials line might have been a last-ditch attempt to bring the reluctant into the fold. The class writeups do feel a lot closer to what I consider "baseline" D&D.
Wonder how well it has been succeeding or failing in this attempt.
At the nearby gaming stores, the owners/managers mentioned most of the copies of the 4E Essentials "Rules Compendium" and the two "Heroes of ..." titles, were sold to already existing 4E players who were playing in the weekly 4E D&D games at the stores.
The remaining copies on the shelves have been more or less collecting dust ever since the release date. No need for backordering any of them yet. One manager even mentioned, the 4E Essentials titles may very well end up shortly on their "do not backorder" lists.
Last time I checked out the local big box bookstores, it appears the 4E Essentials titles haven't moved that quickly either. (Not even when there's xmas season discount coupons). I just moved the magnetic security strips to a certain page in the books. When I checked back month(s) later, the magnetic security strips are still on the same exact page I placed them.
I tried it when it came out. It's not for me. Luckily, all the OSR games came out, so I'm well taken care of.
D&D 4e fails because at its heart D&D is a simple, fast playing game. 3e got away with complicating combat because it still was largely similar to the previous versions of D&D and the learning curve wasn't too steep.
4e changed too much and stripped away too much of the flavor text. It doesn't even matter if its a pretty good game design, closer to Palladium than D&D but still, I don't think many people would complain if Rifts got converted to 4e.
But what we ended up with is a complex game that doesn't map well to previous editions, that stripped away the material that is most likely to appeal to readers and new players that don't grok the numbers yet. Add to that a paradim shift in how the game is intended to be played and yeah, no surprises, not a winning product.
Incidentally, while it's totally hypocritical, the new Gamma World intrigues me more and more and I wouldn't mind seeing Palladium adapt to the 4e rules.
D&D4 is 30 minutes of fun crammed into four hours.
Quote from: Monster Manuel;427186...the answer to a whole lot of unasked questions.
Interesting idea. I find a lot of the Expanded Universe Star Wars novels struck me as trying to do the same thing - fix some problem or explain some mystery they found in the original three movies, stuff that didn't need fixing or explanation.
I do think Essentials was a bid at non-4e players, the same way that the WFRP3 Guides and Vaults is a way to try and bring people in who don't want rules pamphlets with all actual rules on cards.
Why didn't I go for Essentials, basically because AM convinced me he was right. There is no real difference and Essentials classes are just another option along with all the old stuff. It's just a marketing ploy, same as Gamma World. GW is 4e lite, with all the stuff people didn't about 4e taken out, except now it looks like stuff like skill challenges are making their way back in. How long until healing surges?
Essentials and GW are just palatable gateway drugs to get people invested in the same old 4e engine they didn't buy into the first time around.
D&D4e = prison sodomy (minus the pack of menthols and the security of being someone's bitch)....from what I've heard.
Quote from: thedungeondelver;427278D&D4 is 30 minutes of fun crammed into four hours.
Threads like these prove that the same criticisms get recycled for every edition. For those who don't know, the above is close to being a quote from Ryan Dancey, who posted it on Mike Mearls' Livejournal (http://mearls.livejournal.com/105311.html?thread=805471#t805471) five years ago (which, of course, was a good while before 4e). He was quoting Dave Wise's wife, who made the observation after watching a gaming session for an earlier edition - I'm guessing 3e, but the context of the quote isn't entirely clear.
Quote from: Danger;427293D&D4e = prison sodomy (minus the pack of menthols and the security of being someone's bitch)....from what I've heard.
Well between the two I've only experienced 4e, but I'll say that if the DA gave me a choice between 6 months of playing 4e and 6 months of prison, I'm re-upping my DDI subscription.
But then, I don't smoke.
Quote from: Danger;427293D&D4e = prison sodomy (minus the pack of menthols and the security of being someone's bitch)....from what I've heard.
So you're saying you haven't played 4e yet? :teehee:
Quote from: ColonelHardisson;427297Threads like these prove that the same criticisms get recycled for every edition. For those who don't know, the above is close to being a quote from Ryan Dancey, who posted it on Mike Mearls' Livejournal (http://mearls.livejournal.com/105311.html?thread=805471#t805471) five years ago (which, of course, was a good while before 4e). He was quoting Dave Wise's wife, who made the observation after watching a gaming session for an earlier edition - I'm guessing 3e, but the context of the quote isn't entirely clear.
Actually it came from an article about Wizards' corporate history where the first demo of Magic: The Gathering for investors was being described.
That's where I first heard it, anyway.
Basically it just proves that people get tired of "upgrading" eventually, and due to the wonders of the internet, can tell everyone else about it.
When 5e gets published in 2 years, we'll hear the crying of the current 4e players.
Upgrading? 4e?
Quantitative superiority is next to non-existant when it comes to game design.
Now if you mean changing a product enough that it is completely incompatible with the product the customer already has in order to ensure room to sell them more product, well 4e certainly was an upgrade for someone.
I picked up the D&D Starter Set when it appeared at my favorite used book store last week (Yes, I think 4E sucks, but I try to keep an open mind). I've been messing with it and I think the only thing they got right was the price point. The 4E structure that I didn't like is still there to still not like.
Thing is, I've been introducing people to Basic D&D at the bar and they are really taking a shine to it because it is elegantly simple. If the D&D Starter Set had more in common with Basic D&D than just the cover art, this could really rock. Instead, it looks like a deliberate attempt to just rearrange the pieces of 4E's Keep on the Shadowfell / QuickStart Rules to be more palatable and no matter how thin you slice it, it is still baloney.
I'm going to salvage the dice and the map from this, but that is about all I've found of use.
...because it already has, and that's pretty much all there is to it. I'm not seeing any movement on the 4e hardcovers in my FLGS, they're not even being fondled. I mean, it's CHRISTMAS and WOTC doesn't think there's any 4e product that could be profitably be released for the holiday.
It's Essentials, now, and I wish it the best. I'm sticking with AD&D for the time being.
Another thing- they kept the idea of alignments, then neutered it. They literally removed the two most interesting alignments in the game. A chaotic evil villain is rarely compelling at the table to the point where the players themselves hate him. Usually, at most he "needs to be stopped". The truly classic villains in my experience tend towards Lawful evil- evil geniuses, corrupt kings, etc. To truly be a hypocrite, and thus have the *players* hate you, you have to use the letter of the law in your own favor. Similarly, another way to be hated is the freedom to act evilly with impunity- what you're doing is technically legal.
As a foil to this kind of villain a chaotic good character is one of the few who can cut through the red tape bullshit and get some of that old fashioned justice. This is incredibly satisfying- when the chaotic good characters have the villain cornered and he pleads or threatens based on an assumption that they are law abiding citizens. The moment he realizes they're not is the stuff memorable campaigns are made of.
So of course, 4e gets rid of these two alignments. Wouldn't want the game to actually have some drama.
I'm definitely trying to present a case here but I don't believe that the only interesting good guys are chaotic good or that the only interesting bad guys are lawful evil. I just personally find these two alignments easier to work with quickly. They practically sketch the first lines of a personality.
Quote from: Monster Manuel;427348Another thing- they kept the idea of alignments, then neutered it.
Chaotic Good and Lawful Evil didn't go anywhere. The Good alignment conflates Chaotic Good and Neutral Good; the Evil alignment, in a similar vein, encompasses Lawful Evil and Neutral Evil.
If I'd been the one doing the redesign, I'd just call them Good "Chaotic Good", and Evil "Lawful Evil".
That didn't bother me, but then again, I've always had a very laissez-faire approach to alignments. These have always been an afterthought to me. I've always been partial to the original, single-axis, Lawful/Neutral/Chaotic split, and for the better part of my gaming life I've ignored alignment languages, know alignment, and even in AD&D I've used detect evil as per the D&D RC/BECMI description (i.e. more of a "detect danger" than a "detect evil alignment" spell). And I'm an enthusiast of Jeff Rients' Threefold Apocalyptic Alignment Test (http://jrients.blogspot.com/2008/07/jeffs-threefold-apocalyptic-alignment.html). So take my advice in alignments with a grain of salt.
Quote from: Doom;427327...because it already has, and that's pretty much all there is to it.
Maybe it's just the online doomsaying, but I sometimes get that feeling as well. It's sad, really, because regardless of my own feelings on 4e, I don't think anyone in their right minds wants to see the industry's premier IP tank.
Not having actual sales figures, we are left to speculate based on scattered anecdotal evidence, and to fear for the hobby's future.
Quote from: The Butcher;427357I don't think anyone in their right minds wants to see the industry's premier IP tank.
Not so sure about this.
Some people are not driven at all by money or business reasons, but motivated more by "ideological" reasons. These are the people who greatly enjoy watching things they hate, become failures. (Even in cases where they have absolutely nothing to gain monetarily).
In another niche or genre, such individuals could be regarded as "fanatics".
Quote from: ggroy;427360Not so sure about this.
Some people are not driven at all by money or business reasons, but motivated more by "ideological" reasons. These are the people who greatly enjoy watching things they hate, become failures. (Even in cases where they have absolutely nothing to gain monetarily).
In another niche or genre, such individuals could be regarded as "fanatics".
I know this wasn't directed at me, but I'd like to use it as a jumping off point.
I don't hate D&D or WotC or want either to fail. I'm not fond of Hasbro, but I love D&D. I just want it to become the game I loved again; preferably with a new edition. I'd love to see a cleaner version of 3e, with the flavor sensibilities of 2e and earlier. The original red box hit things pretty well, but I'd have liked a greater sense of scope. Rules light, I guess, but just tons and tons of options for classes, races, etc. AD&D/D&D3 style Races and Classes, but a simpler game. Something like a basic Pathfinder, really.
Quote from: ggroy;427360Not so sure about this.
Some people are not driven at all by money or business reasons, but motivated more by "ideological" reasons. These are the people who greatly enjoy watching things they hate, become failures. (Even in cases where they have absolutely nothing to gain monetarily).
In another niche or genre, such individuals could be regarded as "fanatics".
Well, that's not my take at all. My feeling is that D&D has always just about always been in bad hands. Whether it was the Blumes insisting on more wargamey elements (which I like incidentally) or Lorraine Williams raping TSR for money, or WotC and Hasbro trying to change it from a great game into a great money maker, the IP has always been in bad hands. I've never quite been able to wrap my head around people's loyalty to it.
Mind you, if D&D went down it might be rough on gaming stores and distributors but not catostrophic. I would suspect their existing stocks would vanish pretty quickly as hard core fans snached up the books they didn't get yet. Unfortunately I doubt the retail market would go looking for the next big rpg unless a solid contender would appear. Though, it might be Pathfinder is doing well enough that they'd just expand into the void.
Quote from: Monster Manuel;427361Rules light, I guess, but just tons and tons of options for classes, races, etc. AD&D/D&D3 style Races and Classes, but a simpler game. Something like a basic Pathfinder, really.
Actually that's an interesting point. Outside of Castles and Crusades, when has D&D ever had an edition that was simple but had lots of options?
They've always gone with stripping down the options with the rules.
If D&D went under, every LGS you know would be in serious trouble. Many would close, though some would survive. I suspect those that survived would really limit the rpg section, and get more minis and boardgames and comics. CCG's would possibly keep a few afloat, if the stores didn't expand into other areas.
Quote from: Soylent Green;427200For what it's worth, I don't like any version of D&D very much.
Same here, and that includes AD&D and Pathfinder: D&D 4e fails because it is... D&D.
I'm not so convinced of that at all.
When I go into a FLGS, I might see one table have D&D players. Another has M:TG. The other 4 or 5 tables? Warhammer 40k and fantasy, mostly.
On special nights there'll be a throng of M:TG players, or maybe Monsterpocalypse, or some other games.
But, for years, Warhammer 40k has dominated the scene, with only a few weeks here and there for fads.
It's already been (dubiously) claimed that Pathfinder is outselling D&D in some markets. The fact that such a claim could be considered, instead of laughed at as a joke, sums up the current situation.
It'd be like saying the New England Patriots was losing to high school football teams--if that was taken seriously, would you honestly claim the Patriots were really a great NFL team?
I don't want it to fail, just wanted it to have its own name ("Essentials" works, I suppose)...but it already has. The FLGS can survive the loss of D&D well enough.
Quote from: danbuter;427375If D&D went under, every LGS you know would be in serious trouble. Many would close, though some would survive. I suspect those that survived would really limit the rpg section, and get more minis and boardgames and comics. CCG's would possibly keep a few afloat, if the stores didn't expand into other areas.
Nonsense, CCGs, Warhammer, and Board Games are all bigger sellers these days. They'd just find something else to put on that shelf.
Quote from: Doom;427379It'd be like saying the New England Patriots was losing to high school football teams--if that was taken seriously, would you honestly claim the Patriots were really a great NFL team?
No, it's like saying GE was selling more blenders than Amazon sold audiobook copies of the latest novel.
Seanchai
Quote from: Monster Manuel;427186...the answer to a whole lot of unasked questions.
This is why it falls short for me. Maybe there needed to be a revision, rules culling or even a new edition. I don't think the latter was necessary, but when 4e was announced I had more hope than cynicism.
I'm really late to complaining about it, but it's finally reached boiling point for me.
Here's what's wrong with it in my estimation:
Every single rule that moves away from immersion. 3e got this right, and even 2e did. Now we have characters that do things because the rules need someone who can do that thing. Spellcasters are the opposite of interesting.
It just strikes me as an edition that was purely based on killing OGL material. It didn't work in my estimation, but it's nevertheless a bad reason to make a new edition. The higher-ups wanted a new edition as different from the older editions as possible designed to sell secondary services and products like minis, and the writers churned it out. I don't think it was designed to be a good game, so much as a good marketing vehicle.
There are other ways of looking at it. 4e is a well-designed game, but one has to look at what it is designed to do. The later the generation of the game, the less general and open the design model, and the more specific the game it plays best.
It's not shite, or poorly designed, as long as one wants to play the game it is made for.
However...and this is where it becomes an issue...this IS the best supported, most played, highest-visibility game in the industry.
And losing the toolkit nature of some of the earlier games and narrowing the types of games/player styles/settings that the game is compatable with reduces the possible audience.
One of the reasons so many other games are doing well is this sharpenning of focus by the frontrunner. D&D4e has become a better heroic strategy/combat game.
And has also somewhat quit the field in immersive RP.
Quote from: LordVreeg;427387One of the reasons so many other games are doing well is this sharpenning of focus by the frontrunner. D&D4e has become a better heroic strategy/combat game.
And has also somewhat quit the field in immersive RP.
Interestingly enough, There is an encounter in the
D&D Starter Set dungeon which has the Players fighting chess pieces.
Now chess piece monsters have been in
D&D for a long long time, but it really did exemplify that the game is more about heroic strategy/combat than immersive roleplaying.
Quote from: thedungeondelver;427278D&D4 is 30 minutes of fun crammed into four hours.
No, that was 3e. 4e is the same, but they took out the 30 minutes of fun.
RPGPundit
Quote from: LordVreeg;427387There are other ways of looking at it. 4e is a well-designed game, but one has to look at what it is designed to do. The later the generation of the game, the less general and open the design model, and the more specific the game it plays best.
It's not shite, or poorly designed, as long as one wants to play the game it is made for.
However...and this is where it becomes an issue...this IS the best supported, most played, highest-visibility game in the industry.
And losing the toolkit nature of some of the earlier games and narrowing the types of games/player styles/settings that the game is compatable with reduces the possible audience.
One of the reasons so many other games are doing well is this sharpenning of focus by the frontrunner. D&D4e has become a better heroic strategy/combat game.
And has also somewhat quit the field in immersive RP.
I agree that 4e is a well designed game, but as Rodney Dangerfield might say "Designed for what, I have no idea." Seriously though, I played 4e. I pushed aside my initial misgivings and gave it a shot. I played as a player in two campaigns, and ran 5 levels of my own. I actually had fun as a player, as long as I didn't think of it as an RPG in the sense of the kind of RPG I like. It feels like "D&D Presents: some sort of game". It doesn't feel like D&D to me.
Quote from: Monster Manuel;427522I agree that 4e is a well designed game, but as Rodney Dangerfield might say "Designed for what, I have no idea." Seriously though, I played 4e. I pushed aside my initial misgivings and gave it a shot. I played as a player in two campaigns, and ran 5 levels of my own. I actually had fun as a player, as long as I didn't think of it as an RPG in the sense of the kind of RPG I like. It feels like "D&D Presents: some sort of game". It doesn't feel like D&D to me.
I left D&D a while ago.
But I know what a game does well and not. There have been generational changes, some of which I mention. But that narrowing of scope comes at a cost in other areas. I think that is what makes it so different for me. I left D&D to work on skill based rules that were LESS encounter-centric than aD&D and more RP biased. So while I left D&D, I have bought each succeeding ruleset, and did do a playtest with some friends. And the direction 4e has gone to specialize is the opposite direction I went. Therefor, my particular perspective notices the generational changes more than someone who might have been using D&D more for the type of game that it became more focused on. And perhaps your perspective as well.
Quote from: RPGPundit;427521No, that was 3e. 4e is the same, but they took out the 30 minutes of fun.
RPGPundit
The "30 Minutes of Fun" is a load of hogwash born out of a non-gamer's zinger at watching a bunch of staffers play. What it developed to was an actively destructive motivational slogan when it assumed that only the portion of the game which was "kickin' ass with mechanical support" was the "fun." It's like arguing that movies need to be 90 minutes of CGI action sequences.
Quote from: Cole;427548The "30 Minutes of Fun" is a load of hogwash born out of a non-gamer's zinger at watching a bunch of staffers play. What it developed to was an actively destructive motivational slogan when it assumed that only the portion of the game which was "kickin' ass with mechanical support" was the "fun." It's like arguing that movies need to be 90 minutes of CGI action sequences.
Ditto.
30 minutes of fun for who and who the heck was DMing?
Quote from: Seanchai;427384No, it's like saying GE was selling more blenders than Amazon sold audiobook copies of the latest novel.
Seanchai
Nice try on the spin, but as usual when you 4venge, completely and purposely incorrect. :D
I don't think D&D keeps many game shops in business.
Most are kept alive by comics or 40K.
Yeah. I haven't seen a game store being kept alive by D&D specifically for decades now.
Quote from: CRKrueger;427639Nice try on the spin, but as usual when you 4venge, completely and purposely incorrect.
Really? 'Cause I would have said it was the bitter dumping on 4e that was the stretch...
Let's see...WotC sells it's D&D rules and content two ways. One is via printed materials and the other is via a DDI subscription. As far as I know, all the rules and much of the other content that appears in the printed materials is duplicated online.
Thus if all you want are rules and not fluff about, oh, Torog and the Underdark, you don't have to purchase any printed materials. This is particularly true for player content.
Paizo only sells its Pathfinder content via printed material. Every Paizo purchase contributes to its book sales figures.
Thus if all you're doing is comparing sales of printed materials, you're comparing apples and oranges (and any professional versus high school team analog you dream up will fall flat).
If you think about it, WotC has made their printed books obsolete and it's competitors
still struggle to catch up to them...
Seanchai
The analogy that comes to mind, maybe, is if a major league baseball team is being matched in ticket sales by its former AAA affiliate - i.e. if the major is still doing better business with broadcast rights, merchandising, etc. etc., eclipsing the ticket sales it's still weird that the AAA team is doing better on tickets.
Quote from: Cole;427665The analogy that comes to mind, maybe, is if a major league baseball team is being matched in ticket sales by its former AAA affiliate - i.e. if the major is still doing better business with broadcast rights, merchandising, etc. etc., eclipsing the ticket sales it's still weird that the AAA team is doing better on tickets.
And yet that sort of thing happens all the time.
Popular college or even high school teams can have sellout games, but the White Sox are lucky to fill more than a half of the stadium on any given game even the year right after they won the series.
Wonder what proportion of 4E splatbook sales were from individuals playing in official RPGA type games.
Quote from: jgants;427688And yet that sort of thing happens all the time.
Popular college or even high school teams can have sellout games, but the White Sox are lucky to fill more than a half of the stadium on any given game even the year right after they won the series.
It does make a certain amount of sense to me. (Though is the same true of the professional minors - there's a reason I drew that particular comparison.)
Christ, really? People are still ragging on this same old shit? For fuck's sake people we're halfway to 5e and it's the same old "it's not an RPG, it's a boardgame"-y crap. It is what it is. If you don't like it, go play something you do like. My fucking god, you're beating the ground the horse died on. The poor fucker rotted away long ago. I'm not going to put up an edition war style argument here, I'm just saying MOVE THE FUCK ON. Sheesh.
Quote from: Benoist;427655Yeah. I haven't seen a game store being kept alive by D&D specifically for decades now.
I don't think I've EVER seen one. Around here it's always been on back shelves of comic book stores, book stores, hobby stores (models and trains) or game stores that mostly focused on war-games/miniatures/boardgames. I've never seen an RPG store... Or even a store that was mostly about selling RPGs.
Quote from: Seanchai;427663Really? 'Cause I would have said it was the bitter dumping on 4e that was the stretch...
Let's see...WotC sells it's D&D rules and content two ways. One is via printed materials and the other is via a DDI subscription. As far as I know, all the rules and much of the other content that appears in the printed materials is duplicated online.
Thus if all you want are rules and not fluff about, oh, Torog and the Underdark, you don't have to purchase any printed materials. This is particularly true for player content.
Paizo only sells its Pathfinder content via printed material. Every Paizo purchase contributes to its book sales figures.
Thus if all you're doing is comparing sales of printed materials, you're comparing apples and oranges (and any professional versus high school team analog you dream up will fall flat).
If you think about it, WotC has made their printed books obsolete and it's competitors still struggle to catch up to them...
Seanchai
Actually... you're wrong. Pathfinder sells digital/PDF's of all their material (and for the main rulebooks it's substantially cheaper) as well as print products... in fact they even sell subscriptions where you can get both the PDF and print versions of their material... they also have an official CB under Hero Lab and a free SRD... so why haven't their printed books become obsolete?
Quote from: IMLegend;427708Christ, really? People are still ragging on this same old shit? For fuck's sake people we're halfway to 5e and it's the same old "it's not an RPG, it's a boardgame"-y crap. It is what it is. If you don't like it, go play something you do like. My fucking god, you're beating the ground the horse died on. The poor fucker rotted away long ago. I'm not going to put up an edition war style argument here, I'm just saying MOVE THE FUCK ON. Sheesh.
See, I'm not beating a dead horse, per se. I have little emotion about this aside from bemusement at what happened to the game.
I'm pretty much moved on, and am actually saying that I'd like to move on to 5th edition *faster*. The level of annoyance that prompted this thread is relatively new for me. Like I said I gave it a shot. I tried to like it.
It's been a slow downhill ride from there. I figured this thread was more of a post mortem (How did this horse die?) than a place to whine and moan about the kids on my lawn. Ce la internettes.
Quote from: Monster Manuel;427749See, I'm not beating a dead horse, per se. I have little emotion about this aside from bemusement at what happened to the game.
I'm pretty much moved on, and am actually saying that I'd like to move on to 5th edition *faster*. The level of annoyance that prompted this thread is relatively new for me. Like I said I gave it a shot. I tried to like it.
It's been a slow downhill ride from there. I figured this thread was more of a post mortem (How did this horse die?) than a place to whine and moan about the kids on my lawn. Ce la internettes.
Exactly, it's already failed, it really is time for the postmortem, and prognostication on whether 5e will be more like Essentials, a throwback to 4e, or to D&D.
Quote from: imaro;427742Actually... you're wrong. Pathfinder sells digital/PDF's of all their material (and for the main rulebooks it's substantially cheaper) as well as print products...
A PDF isn't the same. It's basically a copy of the book.
Quote from: imaro;427742...they also have an official CB under Hero Lab...
They do?
Quote from: imaro;427742...so why haven't their printed books become obsolete?
Because they not selling they content of their game outside their books.
Seanchai
Quote from: IMLegend;427708Christ, really? People are still ragging on this same old shit? For fuck's sake people we're halfway to 5e and it's the same old "it's not an RPG, it's a boardgame"-y crap. It is what it is. If you don't like it, go play something you do like. My fucking god, you're beating the ground the horse died on. The poor fucker rotted away long ago. I'm not going to put up an edition war style argument here, I'm just saying MOVE THE FUCK ON. Sheesh.
I agree. I mean, "Transformer III" is almost Among Us and there are still people with this Shakespeare fetish. Blah...
Quote from: Seanchai;427754A PDF isn't the same. It's basically a copy of the book.
Sooo, they're selling you an electronic version of their rules... that is searchable and book markeable... sounds pretty similar to DDI's compendium... I mean outside of the fact that they are letting you own as opposed to rent... but yeah, I guess it's not the same and should probably be hurting their sales of print product even more.
Quote from: Seanchai;427754They do?
Yes... google is your friend.
Quote from: Seanchai;427754Because they not selling they content of their game outside their books.
Seanchai
No, they're actually giving it away for free... PFSRD and selling much cheaper electronic copies ($10 each)... so again, why haven't their printed books become obsolete?
Quote from: Monster Manuel;427361The original red box hit things pretty well, but I'd have liked a greater sense of scope. Rules light, I guess, but just tons and tons of options for classes, races, etc. AD&D/D&D3 style Races and Classes, but a simpler game. Something like a basic Pathfinder, really.
So...Castles & Crusades?
Quote from: imaro;427773Sooo, they're selling you an electronic version of their rules... that is searchable and book markeable... sounds pretty similar to DDI's compendium...
And yet is not. For example, open up your PDF of the core rulebook and find the new classes that were released with the Advanced Players Guide. Of course, they're not in there. And when a rule changes, errata is created, clarifications are made, etc., the PDF doesn't update itself.
Because it's a copy of a book.
WotC sells content. Information.
Quote from: imaro;427773Yes... google is your friend.
Absolutely. I went to Google to find out why it's so unpopular and, already having a sense from your initial statements, found out why.
Quote from: imaro;427773...so again, why haven't their printed books become obsolete?
Because they not selling their content of their game outside their books. You can call a PDF of a book something other than a book as much as you'd like, but it doesn't change it's nature.
For $5.99 a month, you can get every 4e rule released and a great deal of content beyond just the rules. You don't get a book or the rules from a particular book or just advanced classes or just specific mechanical elements - you get everything. You can use the tools provided (if necessary) to use and mash up that content however you'd like. New content is added almost daily.
When Paizo offers something comparable, people will have less use for their actual printed books and their sales will drop, too.
Seanchai
Quote from: Shazbot79;427785So...Castles & Crusades?
Not really.
Quote from: jgants;427688And yet that sort of thing happens all the time.
Popular college or even high school teams can have sellout games, but the White Sox are lucky to fill more than a half of the stadium on any given game even the year right after they won the series.
Yeah, but that's because they're the fuckin' White Sox
Quote from: Seanchai;427787And yet is not. For example, open up your PDF of the core rulebook and find the new classes that were released with the Advanced Players Guide. Of course, they're not in there. And when a rule changes, errata is created, clarifications are made, etc., the PDF doesn't update itself.
Because it's a copy of a book.
WotC sells content. Information.
Yeah, so does Paizo... the PFSRD has all the rules, including the classes from the Advanced Players Guide... so your point is moot... all the rules are free for anyone who wants them.
Quote from: Seanchai;427787Absolutely. I went to Google to find out why it's so unpopular and, already having a sense from your initial statements, found out why.
Totally irrelevant to my point... seeing as "why it's so unpopular..." is a totally subjective statement... but good try on avoiding the fact that there is a CB... and please let's not act like the new web based CB is anything but unpopular right now.
Quote from: Seanchai;427787Because they not selling their content of their game outside their books. You can call a PDF of a book something other than a book as much as you'd like, but it doesn't change it's nature.
For $5.99 a month, you can get every 4e rule released and a great deal of content beyond just the rules. You don't get a book or the rules from a particular book or just advanced classes or just specific mechanical elements - you get everything. You can use the tools provided (if necessary) to use and mash up that content however you'd like. New content is added almost daily.
When Paizo offers something comparable, people will have less use for their actual printed books and their sales will drop, too.
Seanchai
First, all the rules aren't in the compendium... second, Pathfinder already does... here look at this site http://www.d20pfsrd.com/ , all the rules for free... yet the books still sells...why?
Oof, what a beating.
Imaro, meet Seanchai, a 4E Zealot. Paizo touched him in a naughty place when they decided to not support 4E after being fucked over by WotC and created Pathfinder instead.
Quote from: imaro;427742... so why haven't their printed books become obsolete?
Quote from: imaro;427773... so again, why haven't their printed books become obsolete?
Quote from: imaro;427819... yet the books still sells...why?
Why won't anyone tell Imaro why Paizo still sells books?!
I could never be assed to use an SRD.
The 4e CB was pretty easy, though.
Quote from: Peregrin;427901I could never be assed to use an SRD.
I personally used the original SRD a lot when talking about the game online. Whether it was in some general discussion or in actual play the way we use PDFs now, the SRD was a very useful resource for instant copy-paste reference, and still is, when you want precise quotations and the like. Creating characters, running games, referencing spells and feats online. It's good stuff.
I almost always use the SRD for 3/3.5 instead of wrestling with a stack of books at the table.
Well, to be fair, when I was deciding on the first game that I'd be running, ever, I looked at 3.x and was like "Hellll no!"
Quote from: imaro;427819Totally irrelevant to my point...
No. Whether people will use a tool or not is pretty damn relevant to the sale of that tool and other similar tools.
You point out that the SRD contains a bunch of information - and it does. I'll have to concede that point. I didn't realize their SRD was so up to date and comprehensive.
But, historically, the majority of people simply don't use them. They're too troublesome. Books are faster and easier.
Quote from: imaro;427819First, all the rules aren't in the compendium...
Which ones are you referring to?
Seanchai
Quote from: Seanchai;427913No. Whether people will use a tool or not is pretty damn relevant to the sale of that tool and other similar tools.
Not when you don't have a shred of evidence toback up just how popular or unpopular a tool is. Please enlghten us with numbers on the CB's for either system...
Quote from: Seanchai;427913You point out that the SRD contains a bunch of information - and it does. I'll have to concede that point. I didn't realize their SRD was so up to date and comprehensive.
But, historically, the majority of people simply don't use them. They're too troublesome. Books are faster and easier.
So now you've changed your argument to rely on a subjective... "the majority of people simply don't use them..." that there is no way to prove or disprove... whatever man.
Quote from: Seanchai;427913Which ones are you referring to?
Seanchai
One example I believe would be the rules for familiars...as well as those for skill powers...and are backgrounds in there now?
So now books are faster and easier?
But way back on page 5, his claim was WoTC made their books obsolete, which is why their books aren't selling.
Imaro, you'll get a heart attack trying to keep up goalposts moving this fast.
Quote from: Cole;427548The "30 Minutes of Fun" is a load of hogwash born out of a non-gamer's zinger at watching a bunch of staffers play. What it developed to was an actively destructive motivational slogan when it assumed that only the portion of the game which was "kickin' ass with mechanical support" was the "fun." It's like arguing that movies need to be 90 minutes of CGI action sequences.
Oh, I agree. But the zinger was too good to pass up.
RPGPundit
Quote from: imaro;427914Not when you don't have a shred of evidence toback up just how popular or unpopular a tool is.
Sure we do. One, we have a decade of SRDs and their non-existent impact of book sales. Two, we have potential and current 4e publishers citing their inability to get their material into WotCs electronic tools as reason why publishing 4e has been a fruitless endeavor.
But, that aside, we all know how popular third-party materials are: not
remotely as popular as official materials. Thus any character builder not made by Paizo, licensed or not, is only going to enjoy limited popularity. Moreover, the company in question charges per book. To add the latest book to your builder, you've got to play $9.95 or $14.95 - on top of apparently paying for the builder itself. Finally, it seems to me that electronic tools are the purview of WotC and 4e. As Paizo and its fans have built their identities around being different than WotC and 4e, I can only imagine there's some reluctance to tread that ground themselves...
Regarding SRDs, they've been around for a decade and aside from making saving third party publishers the work of having to re-type some rules, etc., haven't had an impact on the industry.
Consider, for example, Pathfinder. If the SRDs were really all that useful, who would buy a hard copy book? If people are willing spend money on a product they could have in another form for free, they clearly consider the expenditure to be worthwhile.
And SRDs aren't all that easy to use. Yes, you can use a Find function within the document, but that doesn't cross documents or provide you with any context.
Here's an example of a search I did on the Compendium:
(http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r272/Seanchai0/Misc/CompendiumExample.jpg)
As you can see, I get quite a bit of information back, across books and publications, and it's organized so I can understand the context of the entry before looking at it.
But you no doubt are a member of the Pathfinder forums. Why not post a couple of polls there. Ask folks if they've given up purchasing books in favor of just using the SRD and how many bought and use the character builder...
Quote from: imaro;427914So now you've changed your argument to rely on a subjective...
I have changed my argument, but not on the objective versus subjective axis. As I said, I didn't realize Paizo had such a complete, update SRD, thus I can't claim they don't offer information.
That claim has change to the information they offer being less useful than WotC's.
I've been thinking and I think the nature of 4e also plays an important part in people's acceptance of electronic tools versus books. I noticed by my third session of 4e that I was no longer referencing books. Everything I needed for my character was right in front of me. I no longer bring rulebooks with me to games, even the ones I run...
Quote from: imaro;427914One example I believe would be the rules for familiars...as well as those for skill powers...and are backgrounds in there now?
All in there. Where there others?
Seanchai
Quote from: RPGPundit;428083Oh, I agree. But the zinger was too good to pass up.
I figured as much - I just think the '15 minutes of fun' is a very destructive little canard and I like to remind the studio audience of that.
Quote from: Seanchai;428166One, we have a decade of SRDs and their non-existent impact of book sales.
Is this correlation or causation?
Quote from: ggroy;428174Is this correlation or causation?
Does it matter? If the latest - and probably last - SRD release hasn't changed the paradigm, is it going to change?
Seanchai
Quote from: Seanchai;428175Does it matter? If the latest - and probably last - SRD release hasn't changed the paradigm, is it going to change?
What's the causal sequence of events?
Quote from: Seanchai;428166One, we have a decade of SRDs and their non-existent impact of book sales.
Seanchai
Pssst, dumbfuck! That SRD has been used as the basis for hundreds of books by several companies that were produced and sold.
Your intellectual dishonesty is cutting off the blood to your brain.
Quote from: ggroy;428178What's the causal sequence of events?
There isn't one.
Seanchai