Quote from: StuartMy point is, you don't want to say "it's like Marvel's Ultimate line".  Better to say "it's like the new Battlestar Galactica" or something.

You're making more out of this than I am. It was more of an interesting (to me) aside on an off-hand analogy, rather than something worth debating at length.

Fair enough. It's too small a thing to get all het up about.

Quote from: J ArcaneWhich is my whole point.  Mearls has spent too much time online, and let the True20 and C&C fans get to him, and started confusing their minority voice for the reality of the mainstream audience, and simply taking as read that the game in it's current form is "broken", when in fact it's anything but.

From what I see, Mearls is not trying to win back C&C players at all. Quite the contrary; the break off of C&C and other retro-D&D games means WotC doesn't have to worry about keeping a small but vocal group of grognards happy anymore. They can move ahead with the sensible business strategy of attracting new customers.

Because let's face it, there are compelling business reasons to put out a new edition of a game like D&D every few years or so. That isn't a sinister corporate scam - it's just good business. And if your business model calls for a new edition, you may as well listen to your customers and marketing mavens and revamp the product to keep it fresh and address user wants.

Regular revision is standard practice with software. The same principles apply to RPGs. Sure, it's shitty to be a customer who was happy with the old product. But a business that caters only to its existing, satisfied customers, without tacking to meet the needs of new customers, is going to flounder.

Quote from: J ArcaneHowever, when it's Wizards and Mike Mearls essentially saying that the most popular game in the world is broken, we just accept it as fact?

Who says D&D is broken? I just see a company revising and revamping an existing product. Doesn't mean it's broken.

And lots of people were happy to play 2E. I played it just fine. The release of 3E didn't mean 2E was broken. It just meant the publishers wanted to both a) make money from new books, and b) use the opportunity of a new revision to revamp the system and make it more appealing to most gamers - in particular the new gamers they need to survive.

Frankly, I think it's funny to see 3E fanboys indulge in the same embittered snivelling as the folks on Dragonsfoot who can't bring themselves to speak the name of '3rd edition'. The symmetry is wonderful.

Quote from: J ArcaneHowever, when it's Wizards and Mike Mearls essentially saying that the most popular game in the world is broken, we just accept it as fact?

What planet do you live on where issuing a new edition of a game is tantamount to declaring the previous edition "broken"?

Is OD&D broken because TSR put out Basic D&D and Advanced D&D? No, the latter two editions were simply attempts to improve on the first. 4th edition Ars Magica is a decent, not-broken game, but I'd prioritise 5th edition way above it because it's such a great improvement.

QuoteWhat planet do you live on where issuing a new edition of a game is tantamount to declaring the previous edition "broken"?

Dude, have you even read the shit they've been spouting?  It's like Mearls has Akrasia's posts all bookmarked and uses them as reference works.
 
The same disengenous and innaccurate attacks on the game, all reading like they're ticking off the popular bulletpoints of the 3.x hater crowd.  

You can't be that fucking blind.

I'm not jsut alking about the announcement of 4e, I'm talking about the actual language being used to describe 4e, and the language used to describe the previous editions.  Shit like the initial press release on TMP, that stupid damn video, Mearls ranting about Western fantasy in the intro to ToB.  

It's all there, you just dont' want to see it.

Quote from: J ArcaneMearls ranting about Western fantasy in the intro to ToB.

I've just pulled it off the shelf and read the relevant section. Where's the rant?

Quote from: J ArcaneDude, have you even read the shit they've been spouting?  It's like Mearls has Akrasia's posts all bookmarked and uses them as reference works.
 
The same disengenous and innaccurate attacks on the game, all reading like they're ticking off the popular bulletpoints of the 3.x hater crowd.  

You can't be that fucking blind.

Let's play a game, J, and pretend that I am. Go grab some of those official announcements and show me the inaccuracies and the attacks on 3.X. Quote me a few things. Please.

Quote from: J ArcaneExcept that in my experience, there actually were people genuinely dissatisfied with 2e, especially after crap like Skills and Powers.  Most of the gamers I knew abandoned the system around that time.  

Whereas, with the exception of a minority voice in Internet forum whiners, I don't see that with 3e.  I see a lot of satisfied gamers who're being ignored, while the dev team simply takes it as some sort of fact that the game is broken.

I think this'll be a lot more like the shift from 3.0 to 3.5.

What happened when WotC announced 3.5?

* Lots of anger from folks who'd bought 3.0 books
* Lots of complaints that this new edition was "too soon"
* Lots of people swearing off WotC

What really happened?  Well, sales stayed good, the fanbase stayed similar or started growing, and pretty much everyone playing 3.0 and still purchasing books ended up migrating over to 3.5 because they saw the improvements and wanted to give it a shot or because there was no alternate system available.

Sure, people are satisfied with 3.x.  That's not the issue at all.  There are, though, some things that 3.x could do differently, in a way that's designed to attract new players and satisfy most of the old ones.

QuoteWhich is my whole point.  Mearls has spent too much time online, and let the True20 and C&C fans get to him, and started confusing their minority voice for the reality of the mainstream audience, and simply taking as read that the game in it's current form is "broken", when in fact it's anything but.

It's about the same feeling I get when I go back and read RPGnet threads and see Forge terminology just dropped into the conversation like it's nothing.

I don't see that at all.  Mearls hasn't said the game is "broken."  He's said that there are ways to improve it.  RPGs need to evolve in order to gain popularity - and the digital initiative is honestly one of the only ideas I've seen that may actually work.  It's not my cup of tea, but I definitely see the attraction.

They're not aiming to keep 100% of the old crowd.  I don't think they're that foolish.  I think they're hoping for a smaller adoption rate - maybe 40%-60% of active buyers - at first, followed by more as the new game gains popularity and the old guard can hopefully see improvements.  Two years down the road, I don't think a 75% migration rate for people who actively buy D&D 3.5 books is unrealistic.

What's more, in theory they will gain new players.  If their marketing improves and the game is fun, this is completely realistic.  They'll keep doing what they do pretty well - sell books to players and not just DMs, and keep the game fresh & fun.  If the digital initiative works, they'll even be able to start pulling in customers who otherwise might not be able to find a group, or who might have lapsed in gaming because they're far away from their group.

I really don't think something needs to be broken in order for it to be improved.

-O

Quote from: WarthurLet's play a game, J, and pretend that I am. Go grab some of those official announcements and show me the inaccuracies and the attacks on 3.X. Quote me a few things. Please.

Do your own work.  I've played that game before, and I ain't wasting my time again.  

And Drew, I'll take that as proof you weren't actually reading any of James' or my posts in the "fighters are wizards" thread.

Quote from: J ArcaneDo your own work.  I've played that game before, and I ain't wasting my time again.

J, when we're trying to make arguments we're required to back up our assertions. It's not my job to find support for your arguments. You should do your own damn work and actually provide me with something to suggest that your babbling isn't just hot air and bong vapours.

Quote from: J ArcaneAnd Drew, I'll take that as proof you weren't actually reading any of James' or my posts in the "fighters are wizards" thread.

I did read your posts, although I can't recall them with eidetic clarity.

And I've just read the section in ToB again. I really can't see any ranting in there. If anything it's more of a celebration of recent trends towards cultural fusion in entertainment.

Quote from: J ArcaneShit like the initial press release on TMP, that stupid damn video, Mearls ranting about Western fantasy in the intro to ToB.  

So D&D changes its tone and feel. Won't be the first time. Tastes change, and WotC would be foolish not to change with them and make the game look and feel appealing to the 16-24 crowd.

I'm assuming you're fairly young. Because once you've experienced several cycles of popular tastes leaving your personal preferences in the dust, you'll grow more sanguine about it.

Anime/eastern tropes aren't my thing. But then neither was the dungeon-punk of 3E. Or the soft-lens vanilla fantasy of 2E, for that matter. But I have stopped expecting gamer culture to reflect my tastes. Eventually, you will too.

J Arcane, you live in the bizarroworld.

The emphasis on rules simplification as 4E design goal is not due to an effort at making it palatable, of all people, to a handful of aging grognards.

It is due to a) the realization that some stuff in there is objectively clunky; b) the wacko-bizarro idea, alas widely shared in below thread, that learning-by-doing is a hallmark of WoW's success and that it can and should be imported into a tabletop RPG, replacing there the "ivory tower model" (Monte Cook)--thus leading to a bizarre turn of events in which last week's greatest 3.5 build fetishists are now clamoring for the New Simplicity.

http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=350298

All of which, however, has fuck all to do with what fans of C&C do or do not think, young man.

Quote from: HaffrungSo D&D changes its tone and feel. Won't be the first time. Tastes change, and WotC would be foolish not to change with them and make the game look and feel appealing to the 16-24 crowd.

I'm assuming you're fairly young. Because once you've experienced several cycles of popular tastes leaving your personal preferences in the dust, you'll grow more sanguine about it.

Anime/eastern tropes aren't my thing. But then neither was the dungeon-punk of 3E. Or the soft-lens vanilla fantasy of 2E, for that matter. But I have stopped expecting gamer culture to reflect my tastes. Eventually, you will too.

This is pretty much my perpsective that I tried to get across in that everyone's-a-wizard thread.

I don't think it's bad or evil or whatever that WotC wants to - how did someone put it - reinterpret with modern sensibilities - the rules.  Makes perfect sense from a business sense.

Though for the most part I've made the move as the editions updated (coming back to it during 3.5 after years away), I just think I might finally be too old to continue. this might be enough of a change to not feel like D&D has always felt to me.

That's never been meant as a knock against the "new" rules (which, quite frankly, we haven't even seen yet so it's all just speculation) or the people that like them.

Sucks getting old...

Quote from: WarthurJ, when we're trying to make arguments we're required to back up our assertions. It's not my job to find support for your arguments. You should do your own damn work and actually provide me with something to suggest that your babbling isn't just hot air and bong vapours.

You've already read this shit, ou've already seen this shit, why the fuck should I have to give you a lesson in reading comprehension just because you refused to see what was there plain as day from the first announcement?

The fact remains that there's a clear approach of "the game is broken, how do we fix it", instead of "the game is good, how do we make it better", and the rhetoric that's been used to describe it and it's antecedent SAGA remind me more of reading shit like Pundit and Akrasia's love-ins for True20 than anything I've read by actual 3.x fans and players.  

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised though that it's gotten such a glowing reception from the userbase here, given how many 3.x haters exist on this site despite it's claims at being "mainstream".