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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.