Quote from: Sacrosanct;560843I wS&P brought in character points, spell points, and rules for flanking, movement, etc that you never saw in 2e.  

I suppose that is true, although all that was optional, and I never played at a table that used spell points, et cetera, so that is coloring my recollection.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;560875Playable isn't the issue. Any edition of D&D is perfectly playable with just the core rules. 4E whiners aren't happy without constant current streaming support that provides new cards with which more impressive decks can be built.

Playable is meaningless to a rabid crowd who enjoys spending hours on the CB fapping over what their characters can do via mechanics in the game.

IMO 3.x would have seen a lot more benefit from DDI, and overall 4e is a lot simpler in terms of potential character customization/optimization.  4e's complexity comes not from the powers/builds in an of themselves but from all of the compulsory movement, status effect riders, and very minor bonuses and penalties, from marks, auras, et cetera.  

4e is a lot more 'on rails' in terms of building and advancing a character than 3.x, but imo is still 'more complex' in terms of that complexity being something that happens at the table.

It's like too many things in 4e worked like 3.x's Dodge feat, where you got a +1 AC versus a single enemy only, and usually wound up being forgotten either by the DM or player in the typical clusterfuck of a melee, and ultimately became less and less important as you leveled.  In 4e these types of situational and circumstantial abilities are both ubiquitous and many of them scale in some way.

Quote from: Declan MacManus;560948Impossible. The rules for starving to death in the wilderness are too forgiving.

I wouldn't know, I never role-played that.

Here's what I find disturbing about this thread.  You had two reactions from possibly differing groups at different times:

1) Some 4e fans said some things that rightfully bothered fans of other versions of D&D that were discontinued.  Not all 4e fans said those things, just some.

2) Now, some fans of 4e are saying they don't want their game to be discontinued and would like to find some way to continue it, such as with a clone.  Not all 4e fans, but some.

So far, there is no known connection between these two groups.  No evidence at all that the people that did the bad things in #1 are the same as the people who say they like their edition now in #2. If there is such a connection, I'd like someone to post it.

So you'd think the reaction of the previously bothered people would be sympathetic to group #2.  You know how they feel, you wanted people to understand how you felt at the time your edition was discontinued, and assuming you're a good person and follow the golden rule you'd want to do unto others in this situation as you'd have them do unto you.

But that's not the reaction from almost everyone in this thread (with I think two people as exceptions).  Almost universally, the reaction seems to be "serves them right, fuck them, now they know how it feels, haha!"

Now I'd totally understand that if groups #1 and #2 were identical.  But, where's the evidence that is the case?  And without that evidence, aren't you just doing the very thing to someone else that you thought shouldn't have been done to you? Are you not just continuing the cycle of revenge now? Are you not now just as bad as the people you were originally complaining about?

In other words, do you really think that because Person A was a dick to Person B (you), that Person B (you) now should be a dick to Person C? Is that how you'd react to any other issue in life? I mean, if you were at a party and someone spilled a drink on you, would your reaction be to spill a drink on someone else?

Again, if there is a particular individual that you're aware of who was previously a dick , that's now making these comments about a 4e clone, I get it.  But, I'm honestly not seeing that connection, nor could someone rationally claim all 4e fans think and act alike on these kinds of topics.  At best, both groups are minorities of 4e fans, and I'd guess the majority of 4e fans never commented at all on either topic, much less have a great deal of overlap in membership.

Quote from: jhkim;560737Is there any reason why they shouldn't have a clone of the game they enjoy?  Wouldn't a successful 4e clone and a D&D Next that doesn't cater to 4e players be a win-win for people who don't like 4e?

It isn't needed?

As long as all the rules are available online, there's no need for a clone.  Whenever WOTC gets round to pulling the plug on the subscriber service, then might be a time to gauge if an audience exists.

It would also be difficult to retroclone.  It's not a core game, with a whole lot of sprawling optional additions that you don't need to clone.  It's one great sprawling mess of a thing that would never be able to fit into a single
POD retroclone book.  It's designed to be perpetually unfinished, so there isn't really an easy point where you can unite fans around a simple cut down collection of rules.  (Well you could clone Essentials only I guess, but what would be the point?  Does anyone really play just Essentials?)

I fully expect a 4e-ish retro-whatever to show itself. It will be interesting to see if the 4e fans embrace something 4e-ish.

I wonder what would have happened if Pathfinder didn't happen. Would 3e fans have embraced FantasyCraft or True20 or other 3e-ish game?

Clearly Pathfinder fans wanted 3.6e so I wonder if 4e fans will demand 4.1 or whether 4.5 would be an acceptable option.

We will see what happens in 2013.

Man, those 4vengers are just afraid of change.  3tards only play their game out of nostalgia.  Time to get with the program, folks.  WotC fired you as customers, so you will just have to play the latest version or suck it up.

Quote from: Spinachcat;560962I fully expect a 4e-ish retro-whatever to show itself. It will be interesting to see if the 4e fans embrace something 4e-ish.

I wonder what would have happened if Pathfinder didn't happen. Would 3e fans have embraced FantasyCraft or True20 or other 3e-ish game?

Clearly Pathfinder fans wanted 3.6e so I wonder if 4e fans will demand 4.1 or whether 4.5 would be an acceptable option.

We will see what happens in 2013.

I wouldn't buy something that wasn't a significant overhaul, streamlining and improvement of the rules.  Basic stuff like fixing multi-attacks, and a coherent rules philosophy for how to handle non combat special abilities would need to come first.

I must say it warms my heart to see the D&D fan base fracturing, one might even say crumbling.  For thirty years D&D was the unassailable juggernaut and it's fans were impenetrable closed ranks standing shoulder to shoulder to shield the altar of AC & HP.

And now they are scattering to the wind.  Who knows what might grow in the increasingly fine soil?  On the other hand, much of the soil was "processed" (shall we say?) by Wizards of the Cost, I wonder if anything good can grow in it?

Oh well, let's just say I look forward to looking back on this juncture in a decade.

Quote from: David Johansen;560966I must say it warms my heart to see the D&D fan base fracturing, one might even say crumbling.  For thirty years D&D was the unassailable juggernaut and it's fans were impenetrable closed ranks standing shoulder to shoulder to shield the altar of AC & HP.

And now they are scattering to the wind.  Who knows what might grow in the increasingly fine soil?  On the other hand, much of the soil was "processed" (shall we say?) by Wizards of the Cost, I wonder if anything good can grow in it?

Oh well, let's just say I look forward to looking back on this juncture in a decade.

D&D's not going anywhere any time soon.  What you call Fracturing is Wizards finally waking up to the idea that it doesn't hurt to actually not fire your fanbase every time you make a move with your flagship RPG product.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;560970What you call Fracturing is Wizards finally waking up to the idea that it doesn't hurt to actually not fire your fanbase every time you make a move with your flagship RPG product.

The hell you say.

The next edition of D&D must always be written for people who hate D&D. Everyone knows this.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;560726The "it won't generate enough sales" part?  That was kind of a zinger.

yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyep.

JG

Quote from: Kaz;560814The only thing I took away from that thread is the terrible moderation (which is heavily documented here, I know). I can't help but point out that one guy was banned from the thread and slapped around for saying 4E blows, basically, but another just a few posts later takes a handful of shots saying Paizo sucks ass, and nary a warning was given to him.

As with most Stalinsts/Oceanians, words like "moderation" mean the exact opposite of what they mean in reality.  

JG

Gotta love it:

QuoteI don't think the Paizo crew has the game design skill or rigor to make a 4e clone that's worth playing when we have a perfectly good 4e.

QuoteTo be fair, the current WOTC crew apparently doesn't either.

I AM THE BESTEST TRUEST FAN IN THE WORLD

I DO NOT KNOW WHY I PUT UP WITH THESE INCOMPETENT DESIGNERS

I WILL FIRE YOU ALL IN MY HEAD

Sorry, I've just choked down a whole platter of this attitude for the L5R card game (specifically, its story line) so like, trigger warning, y'all.

Quote from: Mistwell;560957Here's what I find disturbing about this thread.  You had two reactions from possibly differing groups at different times:

1) Some 4e fans said some things that rightfully bothered fans of other versions of D&D that were discontinued.  Not all 4e fans said those things, just some.

2) Now, some fans of 4e are saying they don't want their game to be discontinued and would like to find some way to continue it, such as with a clone.  Not all 4e fans, but some.

So far, there is no known connection between these two groups.  No evidence at all that the people that did the bad things in #1 are the same as the people who say they like their edition now in #2. If there is such a connection, I'd like someone to post it.

So you'd think the reaction of the previously bothered people would be sympathetic to group #2.  You know how they feel, you wanted people to understand how you felt at the time your edition was discontinued, and assuming you're a good person and follow the golden rule you'd want to do unto others in this situation as you'd have them do unto you.

But that's not the reaction from almost everyone in this thread (with I think two people as exceptions).  Almost universally, the reaction seems to be "serves them right, fuck them, now they know how it feels, haha!"

Now I'd totally understand that if groups #1 and #2 were identical.  But, where's the evidence that is the case?  And without that evidence, aren't you just doing the very thing to someone else that you thought shouldn't have been done to you? Are you not just continuing the cycle of revenge now? Are you not now just as bad as the people you were originally complaining about?

In other words, do you really think that because Person A was a dick to Person B (you), that Person B (you) now should be a dick to Person C? Is that how you'd react to any other issue in life? I mean, if you were at a party and someone spilled a drink on you, would your reaction be to spill a drink on someone else?

Again, if there is a particular individual that you're aware of who was previously a dick , that's now making these comments about a 4e clone, I get it.  But, I'm honestly not seeing that connection, nor could someone rationally claim all 4e fans think and act alike on these kinds of topics.  At best, both groups are minorities of 4e fans, and I'd guess the majority of 4e fans never commented at all on either topic, much less have a great deal of overlap in membership.

tl;dr (not really)

The term you're looking for is schadenboner.

Context is a big part of the amusement factor in this thread, viz. where it was posted. Rightly or wrongly, the other site is perceived as pro-4e, anti-other-editions.

Quote from: Marleycat;560834I just wonder what will happen when the shut the DDI off.

That may be a stupid move on their part as it would be leaving money on the table for very little cost.

The only fly in the ointment is making sure it runs in newer browser as time goes on. While I am a programmer, my area of expertise is not maintaining website. Perhaps somebody who knows more about how Wizards powers DDI could answer this. If Wizards stopped updated the DDI utilities. How long would they continue to be able to run for the average user? We are in the middle of a sea changes to tablet and other non-PC computing devices so that will be a big factor in the upcoming years.