WOTC changes 4E cleric - forums go bat$hit

[Windjammer]

There are two issues here.

The first issue is about the extent and quantative frequency of the errata - which is inherently laughable and ridiculous.

But the second, and to my mind, way more offensive issue is the blatant lack of rationale behind these changes. It's not as if even a majority of the cleric updates were well meant nerfs, to rebalance issues that come up in organized play. No, right now CharOp people and even die hard 4E defenders like thecasualoblivion (who's stopped posting on these boards long ago) go apeship because it's blatant that these errata have no design rationale at all any longer.

Which is why I drag out the one post that, to my mind, best explains the thinking behind WotC' errata policy.

I personally hate the idea of *having* to go to a computer in order to play an RPG, ala D&D's character generator. I would have been a lot more happy if they had released 4.25 or whatever which incorporated all of the giant mess of errata into a new printing, which is sort of what 3.5 felt like.

And even then you're only looking at character classes, equipment, and spells/powers. Anything that the player doesn't directly use can't be auto-errata'd in a character generator, and we've already seen massive, drastic errata to monsters and other bits for the GM.

Not to mention that 4th ed isn't/wasn't actually working towards any particular point. They had settled on the Blizzard/WoW method of "balance", where classes ride the power wave crest, then get nerfed, and then get a power boost somewhere down the line. Instead of having a point they were moving towards, they got into this weird cycle, where you judge the balance as a function of time & errata rather than any current point of the game, creating these weird wave function quantum balance clouds where over the course of time you'll see balance within a certain area, but at any given point it's difficult to chart actual progress.

That's a horrible way to design & maintain a game that is based on dead tree books. I have a gut feeling that if D&D had just said "fuck it" and went entirely paperless, and completely online, it might have fared a hell of a lot better. I probably would have given it a little more leeway in that case.

In FFG's errata-crazy orgies, I will say that in most of the 40k games, you see corrections and minor adjustments here and there (dozens upon dozens of them), but they are literally errata. There's no major revision of paradigm, no drastic power shifts that create, exult, and then destroy entire classes of character builds, and no weekly/monthly change to dread.

source

Or this comparison from the Wizards posts sums up the psychology behind the current cleric nerf perfectly:

The ramifications are rather disgusting.  I've seen where this road leads, as has anyone else who played Warlock in WoW.  Where it leads is that which I shall here dub the Seed of Corruption Effect.

I'm not going to get into a debate about whether the steady stream of nerfs the Warlock class received were warranted.  The point is that they received them, unceasingly, for years on end.  Needless to say, fans of the Warlock were severely demoralized by this treatment.  So much so that when the spell Seed of Corruption arrived with the Burning Crusade expansion, the entirety of Warlockdom reacted with one deafening outcry:



"SHHHH!"

 The few conversations that cropped up in the forums before everyone got on the same page invariably went exactly as follows: "HOLY CRAP, SEED OF CORRUPTION IS AWES--"  "SHHH!"  "But it actually gives us AoE capab--" "SHHH!"  "It's unique and Warlock-flavored while still letting us finally compete with Mages' area-of-eff--" "DUDE!  We know!  Shut up or they'll hear you!"

You'd have to have been there to really see it, but it was downright eerie how this one ability utterly vanished from the radar of otherwise-vociferous gamer babble.  I wouldn't have believed that so contentious and uncooperative a group as the posters on a gaming forum could operate in such absolutely unanimous and unbroken agreement, but there it was.  A certain subset of WoW's playerbase had been slapped so hard so often that not only had it grown to expect and accept each new round of punishment, it had developed the purely instinctual reaction that if it should somehow be given something good, it had better not let on that it was good otherwise it would surely be taken away.

In light of that, you'll have to forgive me for twitching when I see the beginnings of that same notion stirring here.  I prefer a company/consumer dynamic which is open, earnest, and compassionate.  Glimpsing the brief flicker of one which instead induces in its playerbase a psychology reminiscent of an abused child doesn't make me feel good at all about where D&D's 'new direction' is taking us.

[Cole]

Instead of having a point they were moving towards, they got into this weird cycle, where you judge the balance as a function of time & errata rather than any current point of the game, creating these weird wave function quantum balance clouds where over the course of time you'll see balance within a certain area, but at any given point it's difficult to chart actual progress.

I can't help but view it as an essentially naked money-funneling tactic. Obviously WOTC/Hasbro are operating a business for profit, but "now with more profit!" doesn't really motivate me to spend my money that way, either.

[ggroy]

I can't help but view it as an essentially naked money-funneling tactic. Obviously WOTC/Hasbro are operating a business for profit, but "now with more profit!" doesn't really motivate me to spend my money that way, either.

Seems like it.

I'm glad I stopped buying any 4E D&D books, with the introduction of 4E Essentials.  I picked up the first two 4E Essentials books (Rules Compendium, and Heroes of the Fallen Lands), only because I was sometimes DMing the 4E Encounters game at a nearby gaming store.  If I didn't play 4E Encounters back in September->December 2010, I wouldn't have purchased any 4E Essentials books.

[Peregrin]

Well the updates are mostly free...so I'm not sure how it's a money-making tactic.

[crkrueger]

I don't know.  I just don't see how this model can work for a gametype that usually spans many, many sessions.  It may work for "encounter" format play, or "raids", or whatever, but it's absolutely at odds with long-term play.

Wait, you play 4e outside of encounters?  :eek:

[Aos]

I only own two books past the core (The DS books) but i stopped buying when i realized I'd need at least one more book to use the two new books I'd just bought. If i want them I'll pick them up for nothing when 5e comes out. I find all the hate funny though, especially when it comes from people who aren't playing the game.

Beyond that, what kind of jerkoff plays a cleric anyway? That's like playing The Rolling Stones RPG and deciding to be Ronnie Wood.

[Cole]

Well the updates are mostly free...so I'm not sure how it's a money-making tactic.

I am of the opinion that trying to manage updates outside of the pay subscription model is a clusterfuck. But no, clearly you're right, their intent is pure professional dedication.

[Cole]

I only own two books past the core (The DS books) but i stopped buying when i realized I'd need at least one more book to use the two new books I'd just bought. If i want them I'll pick them up for nothing when 5e comes out. I find all the hate funny though, especially when it comes from people who aren't playing the game.

I am not much of a 4e fan, but I don't think of myself as a dedicated hater - I do play in a local 4e game. But I never updated to the online builder and I'm not interested in making sure my dumbass character is up-to-version. I figure if I get kicked out of the game for having an unerratted PC, I should take it as a sign from Gary beyond the grave.

Beyond that, what kind of jerkoff plays a cleric anyway? That's like playing The Rolling Stones RPG and deciding to be Ronnie Wood.

Brian Jones is dead and there's permadeath in the stones RPG. Who wants to be Darryl?

[Aos]

I am not much of a 4e fan, but I don't think of myself as a dedicated hater - I do play in a local 4e game. But I never updated to the online builder and I'm not interested in making sure my dumbass character is up-to-version. I figure if I get kicked out of the game for having an unerratted PC, I should take it as a sign from Gary beyond the grave.



Brian Jones is dead and there's permadeath in the stones RPG. Who wants to be Darryl?

The guy who just has to play a halfling every time.

[Windjammer]

I do play in a local 4e game.

As do I, and so do, I presume, a lot of people in the Wizards thread.

[Aos]

You know i feel for people whose games are getting fucked by this, really, but from the sidelines it's just another in a long line of hysterical outbursts.

[ggroy]

But the second, and to my mind, way more offensive issue is the blatant lack of rationale behind these changes. It's not as if even a majority of the cleric updates were well meant nerfs, to rebalance issues that come up in organized play. No, right now CharOp people and even die hard 4E defenders like thecasualoblivion (who's stopped posting on these boards long ago) go apeship because it's blatant that these errata have no design rationale at all any longer.

CharOP being used as unpaid playtesters?  :rolleyes:

[Cole]

The guy who just has to play a halfling every time.

He must just look taller on TV.

[hexgrid]

I don't know.  I just don't see how this model can work for a gametype that usually spans many, many sessions.  It may work for "encounter" format play, or "raids", or whatever, but it's absolutely at odds with long-term play.

It hasn't caused any trouble for my 4e campaign. The players stopped using their books long ago, and don't care when their characters get errata when they level up with the character builder (maybe because leveling up is already an arbitrary character transformation that makes no sense in the game world.)  Sometimes they're even glad the errata happened.

They wouldn't know about the internet uproar at all if I didn't tell them about it.

[Aos]

He must just look taller on TV.

For some reason, I was thinking of Charlie Watts when I answered that.