More heartbreaking lamentations from 4vengers on RPGnet

Aos · January 23, 2012, 07:47:55 PM

Quote from: Rincewind1;508300Jokes??
Your Humour skill needs more grinding, I am afraid.

I'm certain such is the case.

Cranewings · January 23, 2012, 07:52:23 PM

I think it is a little early for a victory lap anyway. The chance that they are going to grind out 600 pages of something playable is close to 0. I get this vibe that whatever cute GIMMICK they are putting together isn't going to float.

Rincewind1 · January 23, 2012, 07:54:06 PM

Quote from: Cranewings;508317I think it is a little early for a victory lap anyway. The chance that they are going to grind out 600 pages of something playable is close to 0. I get this vibe that whatever cute GIMMICK they are putting together isn't going to float.

You are just afraid of CHANGE.

David Johansen · January 23, 2012, 08:50:51 PM

As I said in Jonas's thread on rpgnet. WotC must throw the 4e fans a bone. If they simply screw them over they won't have a single D&D customer left.

crkrueger · January 23, 2012, 09:05:29 PM

Quote from: Rincewind1;508319You are just afraid of CHANGE.

That's his Cisgendered Privilege talking.

beejazz · January 23, 2012, 09:40:32 PM

Quote from: RPGPundit;508290You know, this thread strikes me as being somewhat in bad taste. That is, considering how pissed off people were at the triumphalism of the 4e-fanatics before the edition change announcement, and considering how some here seem to have been bothered by the SA guys posting things from this forum or others for the sheer purpose of mockery.

I think its a sign of being something of a "poor winner" in this case. For my part, I obviously want the core of 5e to be something that works for the main fandom of D&D, something far far closer to the old school than what 4e was, but I hope that somehow they also manage to produce a game that most of the 4e fans would want to play too.

RPGPundit

I'm fine with edition warring, I guess. I'd just rather wait until we know what the damn thing looks like. Bashing 4e's fine too I guess, but we've heard most of it a few hundred times now.

For example, is there anyone here who missed the last five discussions on which editions need minis more?

Benoist · January 23, 2012, 09:48:58 PM

I am 100% in agreement with the Pundit here.

Aos · January 23, 2012, 09:55:57 PM

The only games that fail are the ones that no one plays.

Cranewings · January 23, 2012, 10:13:26 PM

Quote from: Aos;508400The only games that fail are the ones that no one plays.

Can we expand that to games no one but 2 or 3 groups play? That way we don't have to include anything worse than Palladium.

Skywalker · January 23, 2012, 10:18:54 PM

Quote from: 1989;508155This is interesting. Both 3e and 4e are grid-driven wargames. 2e is the polar opposite. Cook even said that 2e was designed to have a very abstract combat system, himself (don't have the link here with me, at the moment).

I like AD&D1e and D&D4e. I never used miniatures with AD&D1e.

Is it not possible to like different styles of games, rather than just 1?

selfdeleteduser00001 · January 23, 2012, 10:21:34 PM

Oddly I seem to know quite a few people who play 3.5/Pathfinder and 4e and S&W and Lab Lord and C&C and like them all for different reasons. Oh, and FATE and Exalted and RuneQuest and Savage Worlds and a whole bunch of other rpgs, with and without minis.

But 2nd edition C&S was, of course, the BEST. [Best what?]

Skywalker · January 23, 2012, 10:23:20 PM

Quote from: tzunder;508415Oddly I seem to know quite a few people who play 3.5/Pathfinder and 4e and S&W and Lab Lord and C&C and like them all for different reasons. Oh, and FATE and Exalted and RuneQuest and Savage Worlds and a whole bunch of other rpgs, with and without minis.

Its really not that odd. Many people like a variety of tastes and seek out the best things to satisfy those tastes.

Black Vulmea · January 23, 2012, 10:27:28 PM

Quote from: RPGPundit;508290You know, this thread strikes me as being somewhat in bad taste.

Funny, I always thought Schadenfreude tasted like sweet, creamy divinity.

Rincewind1 · January 23, 2012, 10:32:19 PM

Quote from: Skywalker;508417Its really not that odd. Many people like a variety of tastes and seek out the best things to satisfy those tastes.

Spinachcat · January 23, 2012, 10:37:38 PM

Quote from: Akrasia;508276And yet, amazingly, Gygax himself did not use miniatures when running OD&D. (In contrast to Arneson.)

How very odd considering his wargaming background.

Quote from: RPGPundit;508290For my part, I obviously want the core of 5e to be something that works for the main fandom of D&D, something far far closer to the old school than what 4e was, but I hope that somehow they also manage to produce a game that most of the 4e fans would want to play too.

And I want a Magic Pony!!!

Who are the "main fandom" in 2012?

I love the OSR, but I don't see people buying OSR stuff much in stores. I see people buying 4e stuff and Pathfinder. And more importantly, I don't see any non-D&D RPGs like hotcakes selling off the shelves either.

So where this tsunami of 5e book buyers is going to come from?

Quote from: David Johansen;508359As I said in Jonas's thread on rpgnet. WotC must throw the 4e fans a bone. If they simply screw them over they won't have a single D&D customer left.

And if they don't throw 3e fans lots of bones, why would they return from Pathfinder? And those OSR fans want lots of bones too.

Is there really a universally appealing RPG in that pile of bones?

GURPS was the king of modularity and SJ Games' RPG side is essentially defunct so I am unsure if modularity is the answer to financial woes.