There are people who generally play the game as written.

Then there are people who play the game as they wish to, and a new edition or rules errata can't change the way they play.

WOTC is making much more money off of the first group, than they are off of the second group.  WOTC is pitching their wares to the first group, and is trying to attract new players to the first group.  WOTC doesn't care about the second group.  We are lost to them.

Perhaps we should just move on, without them......

Quote from: Jam The MF on December 14, 2022, 08:14:15 PM
There are people who generally play the game as written.

Then there are people who play the game as they wish to, and a new edition or rules errata can't change the way they play.

WOTC is making much more money off of the first group, than they are off of the second group.  WOTC is pitching their wares to the first group, and is trying to attract new players to the first group.  WOTC doesn't care about the second group.  We are lost to them.

Perhaps we should just move on, without them......

Yes, most certainly, we should, and we have... somewhat.

IMO the new shiny thing is appealing, at least for a bit, at least due to the novelty, but if the new product could be better, that effect wears off fast.

We go back to the good stuff, but even so, we constantly look for some new flavor. Hence why so many retro-clones are out there.

It is clear that WOTC does not care about us and that whatever we do next is not thought to be for us.

Where to go from here?
1. stop giving any more money to WOTC = instead, support creators that do make what we want
2. keep playing the games we already have
3. move to new-ish versions of our favorite flavor
3. try new directions in which we may find new cool stuff

I moved on already, at least 18 months ago.  I think in reality it was quite a bit earlier than that, though there was a transition period. 

I'm "interested" in what they do only in the same way that I'm "interested" in a train wreck.  Given that I'm not much of a gawker, that's not all that interested.

We probably spend too much time talking about this particular ruleset and copyright owner, that we don't want to support anymore.  They have received a lot of online attention here, from people who don't want to support them.  I have contributed to that, myself.

Quote from: Jam The MF on December 15, 2022, 01:26:23 AM
We probably spend too much time talking about this particular ruleset and copyright owner, that we don't want to support anymore.  They have received a lot of online attention here, from people who don't want to support them.  I have contributed to that, myself.

This reminds me of an interview I saw with a black actor (maybe Morgan Freeman). He was asked about racism (perhaps how to solve it or how to deal with it, I don't remember), and the actor's reply was to stop talking about it (and address people as people without adding race into the conversation).

You have the right idea. After step 1 (stop giving our money to WOTC) step 2 should be "stop talking about D&D and WOTC".

Many more games and companies have great stuff to talk about. So let's promote more conversations about those.

Quote from: Jam The MF on December 14, 2022, 08:14:15 PM
There are people who generally play the game as written.

Then there are people who play the game as they wish to, and a new edition or rules errata can't change the way they play.

WOTC is making much more money off of the first group, than they are off of the second group.  WOTC is pitching their wares to the first group, and is trying to attract new players to the first group.  WOTC doesn't care about the second group.  We are lost to them.

Perhaps we should just move on, without them......

Someone who plays OSR products like Dungeon Crawl Classics, OSRIC, or Old School Essentials is going to have way more in common with players of GURPS, Savage World, and West End D6 than they will with players of current 5e.

I do think we need to advocate for a separation of the hobbies. 5E players want a GM directed story they are the stars of. Where as any other RPG player just wants a cool setting, fun dungeons, and scenarios to beat.  It's the difference between people who want improv theatre and an actual game with risk, loss, and rewards. RPG players can have the games and gamers who want to play RPGs. And the theatre kids can have 5E and Critical Role and those lets plays by the porn starts that Zak Sabbath ran before he got me too'd.

When 4E came out and WotC sent it's Organized Play advertising minions out, I concluded that my money was better spent elsewhere. DnD 5E just confirmed my decision was the correct one.


I've got OSE, Basic Fantasy, and Labyrinth Lord if I want the D&D gameplay experience.

Quote from: Jam The MF on December 14, 2022, 08:14:15 PM
There are people who generally play the game as written.

Then there are people who play the game as they wish to, and a new edition or rules errata can't change the way they play.

The delusion of most of the hobby is that the rules matter in how you choose to use the rules.

Use a system because you like it. You don't need to justify that choice it is a preference.

Use a system because it saves you a ton of work for how your run your campaigns and the setting you use. Sure I could use OD&D mechanics for everything but I know how much work it would take and often I am not interested in doing that much in my hobby time. So I may turn to Traveller or Hero System for certain settings and campaigns.

Outside of that the only person to blame for how your campaigns are run is the person you look at in a mirror.

Blaming chapters of advice, published adventures, encounter building rules, etc. is a copout. None of the later editions of D&D break just because you decide not to listen to the book's author's opinions on what ought to happen in a campaign.

Following this philosophy allows me to run my Majestic Wilderlands as the setting for my fantasy campaigns for 40 years across AD&D 1e, Fantasy Hero, GURPS, Fantasy AGE, Harnmaster, D&D 5e, Swords & Wizardry, Fate/Fudge, and my own Swords & Wizardry variant the Majestic Fantasy RPG.

Of course if you do this you can't expect your players to magically read your mind about how the setting supposed to work using whatever rules that are chosen for the campaign. You need to be prepared to teach or coach the players on what they need to know.

Quote from: Jam The MF on December 14, 2022, 08:14:15 PM
we should just move on, without them......

Yes. This is the sane approach, IMO. (And it's liberating.)

Yeah, I checked out 5e in 2016, hated it, flipped the books online and haven't bought a WoTC product since and never will again.  This includes pdf reprints, though I bought one product on ebay from a vendor, but it was used so I think I'm okay.  Don't care what they do or what happens to whatever travesty they slap the D&D name on.  I've got plenty of retroclones, as well as all my originals, to bounce between.

Succinctly, "Haha, no."

I haven't paid WotC a dime since 4E dropped. From what I can see, I don't have any real plans to... Except to maybe buy one of those transforming D20 dragons I saw a couple weeks ago on some toy blog.

I've got Rules Cyclopedia, 1E, 2E, 3E, Pathfinder, a whole host of retroclones and nu-OSR-alikes. And that's just for for playing "Dungeons and Dragons", to say nothing of a vast array of other RPGs.

WotC needs me more than I need them, and they don't apparently need me at all. 

They don't because I don't play DND. I do play games based off of DND and make games based on games based on games based on games based on a video game adaptation of DND based on old school DND. They help as a measuring stick for the games i make myself, especially my newest project- a mashup of two games I made earlier. One is essentially a tabletop JRPG with unconventional gameplay, the other is Burning Wheel meets Quixalted meets YuGiOh meets Gundam meets Riddle of Steel. Basically just the stuff I like.

Now, since my TTRPG loving friends are OSR fans, i usually try to fit my game within their expectations of crunch and gameplay. My game has a social combat system and an indepth combat system based off of Saga Frontier 2 plus my older game, so I'm trying to make the game roughly equal to 5e DND (most popular rpg, they played it), or at most Pathfinder 2e (4e but better) complexity. That shouldn't be too hard for an OSR player to grok (they're unconventional. very anime inspired) due to the fact hitting in my game consists of three steps. My game also has multiple races, multiple abilities (martial and magical), giant robots, and a lot more.

tl;dr: I use DND as a measuring stick for crunch and character build diversity, so that's how modern DND influences how I play my TTRPGs. Other than that, no, it doesn't influence how I play the game.

I haven't read a "D&D" ruleset since 3.5, and even that wasn't really for me.

I dropped the official line for OSR products over a decade ago.


I DO wish there was more original HackMaster stuff, though. 

I've yet to play D&D. 

There are lots of RPGs to choose from.  If D&D is getting too irritating, then branch out 

Savage Worlds seems to be the darling game that isn't D&D or Pathfinder (which is still D&D).

Yes, but for one simple reason: a lot of people, especially new people to the hobby, read "D&D" as "the version I can buy at the store today."

So, if I'm not playing that version as my base I need to be upfront about that and realize if I'm needing or wanting to build a new group that I'm immediately passing on a lot of people.

If I don't need or want a new group, but am just running for my existing group, we either have preferences we just do or we discuss what new to try.

Beyond that, not really.

I guess that's less about playing than setting up to play, so no, it doesn't matter at the table once I have a group.