Quote from: RPGPundit;513187I've never cared for using minis.

RPGPundit

I personally agree. They disrupt my sense of combat flowing seemlessly from events in the campaign. But many of my players like minis, so sometimes we use them. My rule of thumb i dont use minis when 1) it is a horror game or 2) there are only a small number of opponents. So four pcs against four to six foes, no minis. Anything over that i will consider using them if that is what people want.

Use miniatures, not use miniature is a debate that goes back to the beginnings of the game. I am part of the pro-miniature crowd. I like using them and they make my game run smoother.

However I think the best way is like with b/x D&D and AD&D. Make the game work with or without miniatures. The best way of doing that is describing thing naturally. Like You can charge an opponent up to your move rate and you gain +2 to attack, etc.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;513197I personally agree. They disrupt my sense of combat flowing seemlessly from events in the campaign.

I used to have the same experience, but it is possible to develop table procedures that are generally successful at integrating setting up the physical miniatures on the table with the narrative revelation of combat. (In other words, as you're describing the ambush you're simultaneously establishing the battlemap and miniatures into the field of play.)

As I said, once you have PCs fight against 30 orcs, and each of the orc is a trained fighter who will use every possible advantage for his...well, advantage, rather then just toss themselves against PCs madly...minis get useful. If only for me as a GM.

I've had more than one gamer friend tell me that the cost of entry for 4e, with what was it now 3 PHBs, 2 DMG, and 3MMs?, was the biggest barrier to them bothering with the game. They're normally cool with system mastery as an at-home puzzle to solve, but that much required core was just a bridge too far for them. They said they just were not interested spending as much money on 4e core as they would for a new video game system.

Granted, you can play 4e endlessly with all that product, whereas a new video game system still needs games and will be out of date 7 years from now. But there's a limit they were willing to spend on RPG rulebooks to just get into the game. Sometimes perceived value barriers are very important.

Quote from: Opaopajr;513238I've had more than one gamer friend tell me that the cost of entry for 4e, with what was it now 3 PHBs, 2 DMG, and 3MMs?, was the biggest barrier to them bothering with the game. They're normally cool with system mastery as an at-home puzzle to solve, but that much required core was just a bridge too far for them. They said they just were not interested spending as much money on 4e core as they would for a new video game system.

WotC's decision to take the term "core rulebook" -- which previously meant "the book(s) you need to buy in order to start playing the game" -- and redefine it to mean "everything we publish" was a disastrous decision.

It was already difficult for new consumers to figure out which books they needed to buy in order to play D&D: Now it was virtually impossible because WotC had obliterated the terminology which allowed you to clearly identify those books. You couldn't even say "get the Player's Handbook" because now there were three of them.

It was relatively unsurprising to me, therefore, when two years later WotC decided they needed to coin the term "essentials" in order to replace the term "core rulebook".

What blew my mind, however, is when they immediately debased the term "essentials" by doing the exact same thing with it: Applying it to non-essential supplements.

Wow, that sounds like a comedy of errors. I never really followed this 4e story until the past 6 months. I will give props for D&D 4e Encounters for offending my sensibilities so thoroughly at first so as to get me back into RPGs. I guess that's a positive...

Quote from: Skywalker;512598In its later years it got a bad reputation regarding the inclusion of rape, particularly due to a group of very vocal RPGnet fans that built a snowball of hate that that site has unfortunately become renowned for.

I want to run a game with these people and then have a ten-foot-tall African voodoo-shaman rape their characters while yelling "BOOGA BOOGA WE PRESIDENT NOW."

Quote from: B.T.;513287I want to run a game with these people and then have a ten-foot-tall African voodoo-shaman rape their characters while yelling "BOOGA BOOGA WE PRESIDENT NOW."

I feel ashamed that I laughed at this.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;513240WotC's decision to take the term "core rulebook" -- which previously meant "the book(s) you need to buy in order to start playing the game" -- and redefine it to mean "everything we publish" was a disastrous decision.

It was already difficult for new consumers to figure out which books they needed to buy in order to play D&D: Now it was virtually impossible because WotC had obliterated the terminology which allowed you to clearly identify those books. You couldn't even say "get the Player's Handbook" because now there were three of them.

It was relatively unsurprising to me, therefore, when two years later WotC decided they needed to coin the term "essentials" in order to replace the term "core rulebook".

What blew my mind, however, is when they immediately debased the term "essentials" by doing the exact same thing with it: Applying it to non-essential supplements.

Guess I would question how these 'new consumers' could so easily figure out what 'core rulebook' meant, but got stumped on what players handbook 2 or 3  dmg 2 or mm2 or 3 meant.

Quote from: Sommerjon;513391Guess I would question how these 'new consumers' could so easily figure out what 'core rulebook' meant, but got stumped on what players handbook 2 or 3  dmg 2 or mm2 or 3 meant.

 
I think this is a pretty intuitive concept. When i firsr started gaming it was easy to navigate because there was one clear phb and dmg (the only possible confusion was which one to buy first) or an intro boxed set. Now there are lots of very similar looking books and it isnt immediately clear which ones you need to play. I can easily see how the WOTC model would intimidate or confuse new customers.

Quote from: jgants;512916Has anyone complaining about "kids these days who don't read" actually been to a book store in the last decade? It's almost nothing but YA stuff. Wizards, vampires, werewolves, witches, kids hunting other kids, manga... it goes on and on and on.

I follow a lot of Author blogs, solo and group, and the big trend towards "I want to eat this month" is writing YA. YA is ruling the roost right now, in terms of high-profile and high-selling series.

Many authors who once solely wrote adult novels are starting YA series. (Harry Turtledove, for example.) And YA series are crossing over into the adult population, the reverse being rare.

The Hunger Games? Big, and YA.

Twilight? Ditto.

Harry Potter? Started the trend.

YA is where the money is being made for big-name and regular authors. They are books written for adolescents, and adolescents are reading them.

People who say "kids don't read" are woefully wrong. In today's writing market, it's adults who don't read. (Or, at least, adult oriented novels don't sell as well, as a category.)

(What's YA? As Robert Heinlein once said, "write the best science-fiction novel you can, then take out all the sex". YA best-sellers are good "immersive" novels, with adolescent protagonists, that feature with little or no sex (replacing them with romance and attraction), and generally toned down violence. Not "Rule 34", in other words. I'm not making a moral judgment, my own tastes tend towards non-YA books, just trying to define the category for those who don't pay attention to the literary market.)

Actually, the largest market for books in North America right now is middle-aged housewives.

Romance novels outsell every other genre pretty much 3:1.

Quote from: B.T.;513287I want to run a game with these people and then have a ten-foot-tall African voodoo-shaman rape their characters while yelling "BOOGA BOOGA WE PRESIDENT NOW."

Wow.  You are a really naughty guy.  I didn't know whether to laugh or feel outraged, so I settled for a bit of both.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;513395I think this is a pretty intuitive concept. When i firsr started gaming it was easy to navigate because there was one clear phb and dmg (the only possible confusion was which one to buy first) or an intro boxed set. Now there are lots of very similar looking books and it isnt immediately clear which ones you need to play. I can easily see how the WOTC model would intimidate or confuse new customers.

New player to me today, set to join my 5th level 4e game:

"I'll make my own character - just waiting for the Essentials box to arrive!"

I felt sad as I had to explain that that Red Box was just a pay-to-preview and she'd actually need "Heroes of the Fallen Lands" to make the PC she wanted.