Quote from: MarionPoliquinFor the record, since there seems to be some confusion : The top (front) card is a preview of the Spined Devil stat block for the D&D4 skirmish game.

It says 'ROLEPLAYING STATS' in caps and everything.

Quote from: HaffrungThis is part of a broader issue for me; the increasing cross-polinization of D&D mechanics and terms with other geek genres, like superheroes, video-games, etc. More and more players want RPGs to be like their favourite TV show, movie, or comic. Since I am completely oblivious to that source material, this can only serve to alienate me and my group further from the mainstream commercial D&D scene.

Hell, I've known DMs and even game designers to want that. I hear this one "Gygax" dude stole shamelessly from the popular fiction of the day, and even ripped his magic system off from some novelist. That's not good honest D&D!

QuoteIMHO, this is becoming more of a problem for WotC as their market stretches to include 12 to 45-year-olds, at the same time when there's increasing pressure to reflect youth-culture trends. The more you cater to the younger or more geek-literate gamers by making PCs more like superheroes, or using anime motifs in the artworks, the more you alienate the older players.

Well, those older gamers who don't like new things. I mean, you're by all means welcome to hate everything made after 1984, that's your option, but based on the number of middle-aged guys playing Yu-Gi-Oh down at my LGS says it's not universal.

Quote from: darIt says 'ROLEPLAYING STATS' in caps and everything.

You're right, I thought that line referred only to the attributes line just above, but I may very well be mistaken. As I said, maybe in D&D4 the stat blocks for the skirmish game and the roleplaying game are the same. I don't know.

Quote from: Christmas ApeWell, those older gamers who don't like new things. I mean, you're by all means welcome to hate everything made after 1984, that's your option, but based on the number of middle-aged guys playing Yu-Gi-Oh down at my LGS says it's not universal.

I'm 32 (nearing 33) and I've been playing RPGs for at least 23 years - apart from a dry spell in college.  I'm a veteran DM of quite a few play-styles, and have run D&D, AD&D, 2e, 3.x, Earthdawn, Paranoia 2e and XP, Mythus, MERP, CoC d20, FATE, SWSE, and WFRP2 (with some moments of MERP and DC Heroes thrown in, many years back.)

I have never played an MMORPG, only played CCGs for a good year or two, and while I enjoy CRPGs, I think they're poor models for RPGs in general.  (Except maybe for Oblivion, which is the One Sandbox Game to Rule them All)  I'm not a big fan of most anime or superhero comics, and I prefer artsy drama movies.

And yet, I love new RPGs, new mechanics, and most of the stuff I've heard about 4e.  I love getting new WotC books since they tend to be both entertaining to read and somewhat fun to use in play.

From this discussion, I guess I'm not supposed to exist.

-O

Quote from: obrynI have never played an MMORPG, only played CCGs for a good year or two, and while I enjoy CRPGs, I think they're poor models for RPGs in general.

I think there's a big difference between using CRPGs as a model for a tabletop RPG and using innovations and ideas from CRPGs, MMORPGs and the like to inform RPG design decisions. The D&D rules, by themselves, are a poor model for a computer game - they rely on the GM being able to make all sorts of on-the-spot, improvisational decisions which a computer simply won't be able to make, for example - but they've still inspired some awesome CRPGs. The reverse can be just as true.

Quote from: HaffrungFair enough. But when you start creating terms for PCs and monsters in terms of tactical roles - especially if those terms are anachronistic ('tanks'), or taken from other gaming or geek genres ('mook', 'big bad'), you're jarring my sense of immersion in the D&D world and, worse, relying on my familiarity with those other genres.

I can all but gaurantee you that there will be zero reliance on knowledge of MMORPGs incorporated into the book, and that every archetype will have its uses and differences fully explained in the rules.

Quote from: WarthurAnd back in the day, you'd have had the same people alienated by the same sort of thing, substituting "THAC0" for "AoO" and "11 HD" for "CR 11", right?

Definitely. The point I was hoping to make is that alienation is a very personal thing, and no matter what 4e does, the jargon it includes will alienate someone.

Quote from: James McMurrayThe point I was hoping to make is that alienation is a very personal thing, and no matter what 4e does, the jargon it includes will alienate someone.

And all I'm saying is count me among the alienated. And there are others like me. And it's probably inevitable. And I don't expect WotC to care.

Quote from: MarionPoliquinAs I said, maybe in D&D4 the stat blocks for the skirmish game and the roleplaying game are the same.

That would be cool, if done well.

And good point. I think 'roleplaying stats' is there for the same reason its there on the old card, but grouping/placement does look odd, now that you mention it.

Quote from: WarthurI think there's a big difference between using CRPGs as a model for a tabletop RPG and using innovations and ideas from CRPGs, MMORPGs and the like to inform RPG design decisions. The D&D rules, by themselves, are a poor model for a computer game - they rely on the GM being able to make all sorts of on-the-spot, improvisational decisions which a computer simply won't be able to make, for example - but they've still inspired some awesome CRPGs. The reverse can be just as true.

Oh, no doubt - I'm agreeing with all of that!

I'm all for them taking good innovations from wherever they come from.  I like this creature role concept; I think it's helpful.

-O