Quote from: tenbones on March 16, 2025, 11:42:35 PM

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on March 16, 2025, 02:33:18 PMYou know, it is possible for a gross incompetent using poor AI to rapidly produce something worse than either could working alone.  Just saying.

Seen this a LOT outside of the game-design space, in places where lives are on the line daily. And people with paper-credentials with very little experience using AI, don't *really* know their fundamentals in practice, spitting out dogshit that can actually cause things to fail and hurt people.

AI will replace those people, even in the game-space, as it raises the median bar. People that know how to interact with it, that have good fundamentals in their craft (whatever that is), will only get better with experience using AI. All bets are off if/when AGI drops.

Hasbro is not an PC gaming powerhouse development studio. They are now swimming in the waters of sharks far more experienced than them, trying to compete on the false assumptions that TTRPG players and digital gamers are interchangeable. They are in for a rude awakening.

Hasbro should have resurrected "Space Crusade" when they had the chance.

Quote from: Omega on March 16, 2025, 11:04:55 PM

Quote from: Fheredin on March 15, 2025, 08:17:23 AMIf that's the case for Magic--the goose which lays the golden eggs--then the 2024 PHB was likely a simple cash grab. Chances are large stretches of the book were AI generated and WotC may have limited intention to give it long term support.

I doubt fake 5e will last even 5 years before wotc comes out with BETTER! fake 5e 3.8! You'll create characters using real cookie cutters and instead of dice you will just play rick paper scissors because "modern" players cant understand complex things like 1+1. And all this is TOTALLY backwards compatible!

Well, the funny thing is that with 4e Hasbro made the mistake of continuing over and over again the throw good money after bad, trying to somehow turn the tide, and the whole thing was just a constant disaster and utter failure.

One might think that WotC ought to learn from that experience, and seeing that 2024-ed is catastrophically failing, cancel it as quickly as possible... except that no one who was around in 2012 is still at WotC today. So it's entirely possible that they'll just repeat history.

4E wasn't woke in the slightest, but it was a big departure from previous editions. You could legitimately say it was an MMO-ification of D&D, and it did a good job of that.

Which wasn't to everyone's tastes. I really enjoyed playing it but it was definitely a different experience to previous editions.

Hasbro is in a similar position as Apple was right before they bought NEXT and put them in charge of the new edition. Gave them a clean slate, solid system, and Steve Jobs return to Apple. I'm not sure there is any company in the RPG industry that makes the comparison comparable so Hasbro may be Shit Out of Luck. Or perhaps Mearls and Pundit will be contacted, who knows.

Quote from: Kiero on March 18, 2025, 01:23:44 PM4E wasn't woke in the slightest, but it was a big departure from previous editions. You could legitimately say it was an MMO-ification of D&D, and it did a good job of that.

Which is why I hated it. If I want to play a MMO. I'll go play a MMO. D&D was about sitting around the table, slinging dice with friends, and creating epic adventures and memories.

Now? With D&D Beyond, if you don't PAY for it you're limited. If you delete your account, you have NOTHING. GONE. No rule books. No characters. No accessories.

The future of D&D is the pay to play model, courtesy of Microsoft.

What fucking bullshit.

It's bad enough that go to the pay wall model, and then gaslight the fuck out of everyone that the creators of D&D were misogynists, bigots, and racists.

Regular D&D is batshit crazy and has nothing to do with it roots.

I want nothing to do with those rainbow-haired, DEI brainwashed, latte sucking, douche nozzles.

The heart and soul of D&D left years ago and it's in the OSR, and I'll be damned if it isn't.

Shadowdark, OSE, OSRIC, Labyrinth Lord, Swords and Wizardry, and DCC are just a few who have picked up the torch and ran with it.

Fuck 'em. WoTC is getting exactly what it deserves.

4e wasn't MMOish, it was turn-based strategyish ala Fire Emblem or X-COM.  And as a fan of the genre, I do quite like 4e's gameplay.  People've said, and I concur, that WotC would've been wiser to release 4e as a separate game, call it D&D Tactics or whatever, to allow it to stand on its own instead of rocking the D&D boat with such a radically different system after 3.5.  In my opinion that was its main failing, the whiplash that the customer base felt from the complete redesign.  Something closer to 3.5 like 5e wouldn't have been rejected.

Quote from: blackstone on March 18, 2025, 01:54:40 PM

Quote from: Kiero on March 18, 2025, 01:23:44 PM4E wasn't woke in the slightest, but it was a big departure from previous editions. You could legitimately say it was an MMO-ification of D&D, and it did a good job of that.

Which is why I hated it. If I want to play a MMO. I'll go play a MMO. D&D was about sitting around the table, slinging dice with friends, and creating epic adventures and memories.

Now? With D&D Beyond, if you don't PAY for it you're limited. If you delete your account, you have NOTHING. GONE. No rule books. No characters. No accessories.

The future of D&D is the pay to play model, courtesy of Microsoft.

What fucking bullshit.

It's bad enough that go to the pay wall model, and then gaslight the fuck out of everyone that the creators of D&D were misogynists, bigots, and racists.

Regular D&D is batshit crazy and has nothing to do with it roots.

I want nothing to do with those rainbow-haired, DEI brainwashed, latte sucking, douche nozzles.

The heart and soul of D&D left years ago and it's in the OSR, and I'll be damned if it isn't.

Shadowdark, OSE, OSRIC, Labyrinth Lord, Swords and Wizardry, and DCC are just a few who have picked up the torch and ran with it.

Fuck 'em. WoTC is getting exactly what it deserves.

Greetings!

PREACH ON, BROTHER!

Blackstone, absolutely right! And awesome, too. My exact thoughts as well!

WOTC has become such a hate-filled, blue-haired, Woke Commie mess, that I don't care if they choke and die in the gutter somewhere. As you said, the OSR has taken the D&D legacy and has been running with it. Entirely in the opposite direction from WOTC. That suits me just fine. I have AD&D. 3E, original 5E, Dragonslayer, and my favourite, SHADOWDARK. In addition to the many things and sub-systems that I have created of my own for ShadowDark, I am quite happy, and very busy. I don't need WOTC for anything.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: RPGPundit on March 18, 2025, 01:09:28 PMOne might think that WotC ought to learn from that experience, and seeing that 2024-ed is catastrophically failing, cancel it as quickly as possible... except that no one who was around in 2012 is still at WotC today. So it's entirely possible that they'll just repeat history.

I suspect that they were trying to course correct from the backlash they got from releasing 3.5 too soon.

That and near the end Hasbro had wotc on a tight budget leash. I wonder if they did not do a 5e sooner because they lacked the funds. wotc kept screwing up the projects Hasbro handed them and someone got fed up.

Too bad Hasbro did not step in when wotc started their antics again once 5e became successful. With wotc as ever. Failure is the only option. If it ant broke then by god they will break it somehow some way.

I also wonder if they kept 4e going out of spite for Paizi's success.

Quote from: Valatar on March 18, 2025, 02:50:21 PM4e wasn't MMOish, it was turn-based strategyish ala Fire Emblem or X-COM.  And as a fan of the genre, I do quite like 4e's gameplay.  People've said, and I concur, that WotC would've been wiser to release 4e as a separate game, call it D&D Tactics or whatever, to allow it to stand on its own instead of rocking the D&D boat with such a radically different system after 3.5.  In my opinion that was its main failing, the whiplash that the customer base felt from the complete redesign.  Something closer to 3.5 like 5e wouldn't have been rejected.

It was certainly influenced by tactics games and they wanted it to be closer to a miniatures-based tactics game, but Mike Mearls recently said openly that there was MMO influence. (Questing Beast interview)
The way that the classes were deliberately segmented into the combat roles of tank, DPS, debuff, and healer makes this sort of obvious. I'm not necessarily opposed to that, and MMOs took a lot of their design from D&D to begin with, but it's there.

Quote from: Spobo on March 19, 2025, 12:33:23 PM

Quote from: Valatar on March 18, 2025, 02:50:21 PM4e wasn't MMOish, it was turn-based strategyish ala Fire Emblem or X-COM.  And as a fan of the genre, I do quite like 4e's gameplay.  People've said, and I concur, that WotC would've been wiser to release 4e as a separate game, call it D&D Tactics or whatever, to allow it to stand on its own instead of rocking the D&D boat with such a radically different system after 3.5.  In my opinion that was its main failing, the whiplash that the customer base felt from the complete redesign.  Something closer to 3.5 like 5e wouldn't have been rejected.

It was certainly influenced by tactics games and they wanted it to be closer to a miniatures-based tactics game, but Mike Mearls recently said openly that there was MMO influence. (Questing Beast interview)
The way that the classes were deliberately segmented into the combat roles of tank, DPS, debuff, and healer makes this sort of obvious. I'm not necessarily opposed to that, and MMOs took a lot of their design from D&D to begin with, but it's there.

Yes, aesthetically it was heavily influenced by WoW. In terms of game design, it was Forge "Gamist" game, which meant that most gamers would find it boring right from the get-go.

Quote from: Spobo on March 19, 2025, 12:33:23 PMIt was certainly influenced by tactics games and they wanted it to be closer to a miniatures-based tactics game, but Mike Mearls recently said openly that there was MMO influence. (Questing Beast interview)
The way that the classes were deliberately segmented into the combat roles of tank, DPS, debuff, and healer makes this sort of obvious. I'm not necessarily opposed to that, and MMOs took a lot of their design from D&D to begin with, but it's there.

It goes deeper than that; there's a type of magical item economy that uses a special currency as a medium of exchange (I don't remember the details, some type of dust?), along with the general progression of loot being very similar, and of course there was the general factor of an endless and synced progression of to-hit bonuses and target numbers, which had never shared such a mated relationship in any version of D&D before or since.

It's mostly interesting to have the confirmation because it was a contentious forum topic, with 4e apologists doing the "nuh uh you made it up" defense when this accusation was levied against it, despite perfectly reasonable points that really showed such a thing.  And now we have an insider straight up claiming that it was, and for the obvious reason- WoW had hit 12 million players at the peak of Lich King (a number based on an unusual counting of Chinese players, but it was still a large number), and it had already chewed into D&D games pretty hard (video games tend to, of course, but it was quite noticeable and it was a rare table that didn't have at least one guy with a raid night to add to the landmines to schedule around).

So basically, if you were defending 4e on this topic many years ago, you were wrong, full stop.  And if you were saying 4e had taken a lot of MMO bits (usually as a method to attack it), you were correct.  An interesting development, but not of particular importance.

The reality is that D&D is doomed to be a soulless wandering zombie as long as it remains in the hands of a large corporation. When those in control do not love or understand tabletop rpgs the results will always be the same.

Quote from: Venka on March 20, 2025, 04:24:10 PM

Quote from: Spobo on March 19, 2025, 12:33:23 PMIt was certainly influenced by tactics games and they wanted it to be closer to a miniatures-based tactics game, but Mike Mearls recently said openly that there was MMO influence. (Questing Beast interview)
The way that the classes were deliberately segmented into the combat roles of tank, DPS, debuff, and healer makes this sort of obvious. I'm not necessarily opposed to that, and MMOs took a lot of their design from D&D to begin with, but it's there.

It goes deeper than that; there's a type of magical item economy that uses a special currency as a medium of exchange (I don't remember the details, some type of dust?), along with the general progression of loot being very similar, and of course there was the general factor of an endless and synced progression of to-hit bonuses and target numbers, which had never shared such a mated relationship in any version of D&D before or since.

It's mostly interesting to have the confirmation because it was a contentious forum topic, with 4e apologists doing the "nuh uh you made it up" defense when this accusation was levied against it, despite perfectly reasonable points that really showed such a thing.  And now we have an insider straight up claiming that it was, and for the obvious reason- WoW had hit 12 million players at the peak of Lich King (a number based on an unusual counting of Chinese players, but it was still a large number), and it had already chewed into D&D games pretty hard (video games tend to, of course, but it was quite noticeable and it was a rare table that didn't have at least one guy with a raid night to add to the landmines to schedule around).

So basically, if you were defending 4e on this topic many years ago, you were wrong, full stop.  And if you were saying 4e had taken a lot of MMO bits (usually as a method to attack it), you were correct.  An interesting development, but not of particular importance.

Yeah I think it's called "residuum" lol

You're absolutely right and I remember those days. Back when "grognard" was a proxy for what they would call "chud" now, and if you said anything critical about 4e it put you in that camp.

Quote from: Spobo on March 22, 2025, 10:16:38 AM

Quote from: Venka on March 20, 2025, 04:24:10 PM

Quote from: Spobo on March 19, 2025, 12:33:23 PMIt was certainly influenced by tactics games and they wanted it to be closer to a miniatures-based tactics game, but Mike Mearls recently said openly that there was MMO influence. (Questing Beast interview)
The way that the classes were deliberately segmented into the combat roles of tank, DPS, debuff, and healer makes this sort of obvious. I'm not necessarily opposed to that, and MMOs took a lot of their design from D&D to begin with, but it's there.

It goes deeper than that; there's a type of magical item economy that uses a special currency as a medium of exchange (I don't remember the details, some type of dust?), along with the general progression of loot being very similar, and of course there was the general factor of an endless and synced progression of to-hit bonuses and target numbers, which had never shared such a mated relationship in any version of D&D before or since.

It's mostly interesting to have the confirmation because it was a contentious forum topic, with 4e apologists doing the "nuh uh you made it up" defense when this accusation was levied against it, despite perfectly reasonable points that really showed such a thing.  And now we have an insider straight up claiming that it was, and for the obvious reason- WoW had hit 12 million players at the peak of Lich King (a number based on an unusual counting of Chinese players, but it was still a large number), and it had already chewed into D&D games pretty hard (video games tend to, of course, but it was quite noticeable and it was a rare table that didn't have at least one guy with a raid night to add to the landmines to schedule around).

So basically, if you were defending 4e on this topic many years ago, you were wrong, full stop.  And if you were saying 4e had taken a lot of MMO bits (usually as a method to attack it), you were correct.  An interesting development, but not of particular importance.

Yeah I think it's called "residuum" lol

You're absolutely right and I remember those days. Back when "grognard" was a proxy for what they would call "chud" now, and if you said anything critical about 4e it put you in that camp.

Residuum was a ritual spell component (and rituals could be used to create magic items, but that was only one use).

You might be thinking of Astral Diamonds, but those were less a "special currency" and more just a step up the copper > silver > gold > platinum scale due to the ridiculous cost of epic-tier magic items in 4E.

Basically 1 astral diamond = 100 platinum = 10,000 gold (200 pounds of gold).

Epic-level magic items often cost hundreds of thousands to millions of gold and so they added a currency epic-tier adventurers could actually carry on their person instead of lugging literal tons of gold around to make their purchases with as they ventured about the dominions of the gods in the late game.

Basically, heroic tier (level 1-10) you were adventuring in the prime material plane and using silver and gold. Paragon tier (11-20) you were adventuring in the feywild, shadowfell, and/or elemental chaos and gems and platinum were your currencies of choice. Epic-tier (21-30) you were mostly adventuring in the divine realms or sojourning into the Abyss and you made trade using astral diamonds.

Which is rather video-gamey, just not quite in the way your thinking (if they were being full video gamey they'd just keep all the transactions in gold and ignore the encumberance of the literal tons of gold in your pockets... at least they bothered with an alternative medium of exchange that could be realistically carried).