PDA

View Full Version : I will NOT SWITCH !



Xaels Greyshadow
12-25-2007, 06:43 PM
I take this precious moment in time to throw out my 2 cents to the world as to why I will not switch to 4E. Maybe pick up an adventure here or there but will always convert it to 3.5. I may seem to be exercising some bragging rights here, but really don't mean to. I have just been fortunate to have been able to amass my collection. I am only 9 books short of having a COMPLETE 3.5 Ruleset. It's not broken. As a DM I can do, control modify, add, subtract or do whatever I want with settings and rules providing that I am both PLAYING and HAVING FUN. What the heck do I need to invest in another edition for to continue doing that ?

Books I need to finish collection/set:

Monster Manual V
Exemplars of Evil
Sandstorm
Frostburn
Stormwrack
Races of the Dragon
Dragon Magic
Complete Champion
Elder Evils

Books I have:

3.5
PHB
DMG
MM
MM II
MM IIV
MM IV
Magic Item Comp.
Complete Warrior
Dracononmicon
Complete Adv.
Races of Destiny
Lords of Madness
Weapons of Legacy
Planar Handbook
Libris Mortis
Complete Arcane
Races of the Wild
Rules Compendium **NOTE** According to WoTC, this book superceeds and overrules all other CORE BOOKS as far as rules go.
Heroes of Battle
DMG II
Book of Exalted Deeds
Complete Divine
Unearthed Arcana
Arms and Equip. Guide
Book of Vile Darkness
Heroes of Horror
Ghostwalk
Magic of Incarnum
Spell Compendium
Fiend Folio
Tome of Magic
Complete Psionic
PHB II
Fiendish Codex I
Fiendish Codex II
Tome of Battle
Complete Mage
Dungeonscape
Cityscape
Complete Scoundrel
DM 4 Dummies
Races of Stone
Red Hand of Doom
Exp. to Castle Ravenloft
Forgotten Realms Campaign
Deities and Demogods
Manual of the Planes
Expanded Psionics Handbook
Epic Level Handbook
Hero Builders Guidebook
Stronghold Builders Guidebook
Song and Silence
D&D 4 Dummies
Players Kit
Basic Kit

On and On and ON. Anyone wanna just play D&D and have fun ? COME ON DOWN. I'm here waiting.

Happy Holidays

Xaels


Post Script: For some books you may see and know to be 3.0, I have all the current errata and updates for each and every book either 3.5 or 3.0 to 3.5 for books like Fiend Folio, Ghostwalk, etc., etc..


PPS: As of this posting, I also have the complete campaign world of Eberron. I like it. It's new, and fresh, and interesting to me and I can use what I choose from it and trash the rest. Thanks for letting me share.

Mulsiphix
12-25-2007, 06:49 PM
I couldn't agree with you more. WOTC is probably going to attempt to do to D&D what it has done with Magic The Gathering for ages. Making players constantly buy new republished and slightly revised material so they can make a buck. There has been so much material released for D&D 3.X that I can't imagine the need to move to 4E. If you count D20 there is literally thousands of books and game systems to choose from. I too may borrow and adventure, supplement, map pack, etc... from 4E but I don't see myself converting. The changes from TSR to WOTC were very well done and most were needed in my opinion (been reading way too much wikipedia lately *hangs head in shame*). The move to 4E seems like an attempt to make as much money as possible in many regards. Why can't they just make one ruleset to rule them all?!

Maelstrom
12-25-2007, 07:27 PM
I'm going to wait and see. D&D Experience will be very informative.

There are definately some aspects of D&D that could use working on, and if they improve the fun of the game it may be worth the jump. From what I've read, they'll nicely take care of the complexity of grappling and the static nature of 3.5 battles (can't move if you don't want to get whacked in the back).

Of course that comes from someone with not much more than the core books and a few sets of minis... I can understand where others are coming from that are fully vested in 3.5. Fortunately D&D is one game for which any edition can be played ad infinatum if you're okay with continuing to write your own adventures.

The truth is, Wizards is competing primarily with themselves and older versions of D&D. If they want to continue to grow their business, a fresh start may be the only viable business model, as over time the gleam of a specific edition will eventually wear off and sales will drop. And judging from what I've seen so far, they've put a heckofalot of effort into this, for good or for ill.

Olothfaern
12-25-2007, 07:54 PM
...suffer through when it comes to change.

I'll probably be an early adopter actually for the same reason the O.P. mentioned, I own all the books from 3.x, except Elder Evils and the Rules Compendium (I will have them). I've played and DM'd in every setting, at every level range, and pretty much at every pace.


I want more. I want the challenge of learning to bend the new rules system to my will, I crave the discovery of all that is broken then displaying it in games to watch the jaws drop/clench; all the while figuring out how to beat the 'unbeatable combo' when I DM.

That's fun. So is the first month of game sessions when everyone is essentially reading the PHB while role playing in their spare time, at the game sessions! Then the first session where it all finally clicks and you run/play your first entire scenario with no references to the rules.

The grizzled camaraderie your group develops that is so intimidating and envy inspiring to newcomers that leads them to delve even deeper into the rules than the 'old hands' in hopes of unearthing something that will impress the rest of the group so that they might 'earn their cred', the heroically well intentioned but futile deaths due to rule misinterpretations, the writing of house rules (because the designers were obviously idiots for thinking X...).

In short, I love it.

rabkala
12-25-2007, 07:58 PM
I might be a few books off that mark. I have none of the Eberon but all the FR books. A few of your most recent haves, I do not have and don't think I will. I have the environmental books (Frostburn, Stormwrack, and Sandstorm) and would recommend those. I also would never lower myself to by a book with 'Dummies' in the title.

Many of the newest books I have bought, I am unhappy with and will not use. Books like Tome of Battle and Magic Incarnum put a bad taste in my mouth after I bought them. Many supplements seemed no longer D&D, but some bad pandering to other interests who would rather be playing some other game.

I have been doom saying for awhile about the upcoming 4e. I find it hard to believe that I would ever switch. I said that at the end of 2e. I didn't switch for quite awhile as My group was happy playing 2e. Finally though, many players wanted to switch and it was nearly impossible to find new players willing to play 'Old and outdated'. When I finally got into the new edition, I was glad I did switch. Even the upgrade to 3.5 didn't sit well at first, but was a definite improvement. I guess, Never say Never.

Mulsiphix
12-25-2007, 10:38 PM
In the end it probably means little to me personally. The amount of house rules my custom worlds and campaigns will contain will be extensive. I will most likely end up running a hybrid of the 3.X/4E rules. In the end fun is all that matters and the rules should be taken with a grain of salt. I just hate the idea of having to buy all new books for 4E and then possibly having to do it all over again in a few years when they decide to release 5E. I just don't trust WOTC is redesigning the game for the purpose of making it better. Generally they have gone to great lengths in the past to get consumers to buy regularly republished works. I'm an avid MTG player and I've been buying republished cards for close to a decade now *sigh*

Dimthar
12-26-2007, 09:34 AM
There are definately some aspects of D&D that could use working on, and if they improve the fun of the game it may be worth the jump. From what I've read, they'll nicely take care of the complexity of grappling and the static nature of 3.5 battles (can't move if you don't want to get whacked in the back).

The truth is, Wizards is competing primarily with themselves and older versions of D&D. If they want to continue to grow their business, a fresh start may be the only viable business model, as over time the gleam of a specific edition will eventually wear off and sales will drop. And judging from what I've seen so far, they've put a heckofalot of effort into this, for good or for ill.

Why compare the game against Magic "The Gathering"?, Let's compare against video consoles, if we are lucky the product will turn out to be better, which will be the main reason to switch.

Personally, I only stick to the Core Books, and Forgotten Realms Books which are not so much rule oriented, I don't buy Players Guide to Faerun or Races of Faerun for example.

dontadow
12-26-2007, 09:51 AM
For us experienced gamers, we understand that this is a cycle and, honestly, wotc has the best one.

Every system redoes itself after a few years. Dungeons and dragons has the longest average time between editions, and there are only 5 (i'll count 3.5).

Compare that to every other system out there. Shadowrun, Cthullu, Vampire, Rift ,etc. These systems are all on their 6th or higher rewrite and withing a shorter span of years.

What you seem to be complaining about is a business model that has been a staple of the rpg industry for 40 years and works in other game industries as well. Video game systems recycle every 5 years. Popular board games like monopoly come out with an official new edition every 3 to 5 years. I've already mentioned other role playing game systems are far more frequent with their model.

I've read these rants after 1st edition, after 2nd edition, after 3rd edition and they never get fresher and in two years all of these people are usually playing the system quit the game because they can't find players.

fmitchell
12-26-2007, 10:32 AM
Every system redoes itself after a few years. Dungeons and dragons has the longest average time between editions, and there are only 5 (i'll count 3.5).

Compare that to every other system out there. Shadowrun, Cthullu, Vampire, Rift ,etc. These systems are all on their 6th or higher rewrite and withing a shorter span of years.

Just to play Devil's Advocate, many systems go through incremental changes from version to version. Call of Cthulhu I know hasn't changed the core rules much over the years; I have 2nd edition and 6th edition, and 6th edition mainly has more "stuff". GURPS has done only one long-delayed overhaul (4th edition) in the 20 years it has been around. The World of Darkness, similarly, has had only one major overhaul. (I don't know about Shadowrun or Rifts.)

As I recall, moving from AD&D 1e to 2e was a fairly minor jump: proficiencies, a few new or revised classes. 3.x was a major jump, especially since 3.5 came out only a few years after 3.0. And now WotC says that it will be easier to make new characters than to try to convert 3.x to 4e. The pace of change has accelerated since WotC took over.

Taking my horns off, I agree that the wailing and gnashing of teeth is premature, and it's not like all 3.5 books will disappear in a puff of smoke the moment 4e comes out. But then I never bought into the "gotta buy them all" mentality when WotC started cranking out books with even more classes, feats, and new rules. I don't even own the DMG, since I'm unlikely ever to run a D&D game.

Mulsiphix
12-26-2007, 07:39 PM
Every system redoes itself after a few years. Dungeons and dragons has the longest average time between editions, and there are only 5 (i'll count 3.5).There were more than five:
Dungeons & Dragons (1974)
Basic Dungeons & Dragons (1977)
Advanced Dungeons & Dragons (1977)
Basic Dungeons & Dragons, 1st Revision (1981)
Basic DUngeons & Dragons, 2nd Revision (1983)
Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, 2nd Ed (1989)
Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, 2nd Ed Revised - known as 2.5x (1995)
Dungeons & Dragons 3rd Ed (2000)
Dungeons & Dragons 3.5x Ed (2003)
Dungeons & Dragons 4th Ed (2008)

Compare that to every other system out there. Shadowrun, Cthullu, Vampire, Rift ,etc. These systems are all on their 6th or higher rewrite and withing a shorter span of years.Wrong again:

Shadowrun
1989 - 2007, 4th Edition

Call Of Cthulhu
1981 - 2007, 6th Edition (editions 1 - 5 were all approximately 3 years apart)

Vampire The Masquerade
1991 - 2004, 2nd Edition (1998, revised edition referred to by fans as 3rd ed)

Rifts
1990 - 2007, 1st Edition (2005, Ultimate Edition - not 2nd ed or a revision)


What you seem to be complaining about is a business model that has been a staple of the rpg industry for 40 years and works in other game industries as well. Video game systems recycle every 5 years. Popular board games like monopoly come out with an official new edition every 3 to 5 years. I've already mentioned other role playing game systems are far more frequent with their model. Video game systems do not upgrade every three to five years. They aren't new editions. They are revised hardware, completely different systems. The only thing that remains the same is the hardware manufacturer. Even that can be disputed as the hardware used is licensed from multiple major hardware manufacturing companies like Intel, AMD, ATI, Nvidia, etc... Monopoly comes out with new themed boards usually more than once a year. These are no different than modules for GURPS or D20. Same ruleset, different theme.


I've read these rants after 1st edition, after 2nd edition, after 3rd edition and they never get fresher and in two years all of these people are usually playing the system quit the game because they can't find players.This is a serious generalization which once again appears to be opinion over fact. I've met many DM's over the past few months and not a single one was a rules lawyer. Most use their own house rules or swap rules in and out from whatever editions as they see fit. Rarely are DM's rules lawyers and even rarer are DM's that allow their players to be. Most players are just happy to find a DM in their area that has an open spot in a game their running. Those who would refuse to play with a DM based on the rules he is running, most likely have plenty of other options to choose from.

RealmsDM
12-26-2007, 09:53 PM
Is 3.5 perfect? No. But we like it.

Was 2nd Ed. perfect? No. But we played it.

Was 1e perfect? Not even close. But we revere it.

D&D 4e won't be any different, so when WotC tries the whole "we fixed the game" shtick with us, its pure B.S.

I won't wait & see... I don't need to. I'm happy with 3.5, its detailed enough that you can create wonderful PCs/NPCs, and combat isn't all about suspending disbelief, its good enough for a game.

Bottom line is WotC needs money; game designers, no matter how pround, don't wanna write themselves outta a steady job (even the freelancers), any there will always be people searching for the fabled "perfect RPG ruleset" & doomed never to find it.

Mulsiphix
12-26-2007, 10:14 PM
Is 3.5 perfect? No. But we like it.

Was 2nd Ed. perfect? No. But we played it.

Was 1e perfect? Not even close. But we revere it.

D&D 4e won't be any different, so when WotC tries the whole "we fixed the game" shtick with us, its pure B.S.

I won't wait & see... I don't need to. I'm happy with 3.5, its detailed enough that you can create wonderful PCs/NPCs, and combat isn't all about suspending disbelief, its good enough for a game

Well said! This thread (http://www.penandpapergames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2165) is exactly what I'm talking about when I say WOTC is more interested in money than improving the game. I'm all for new content and even revisions in rules, especially when they are optional revisions. What I can't stand is regular revisions of the core rulebooks. It isn't like those books are cheap or small in size. I hate having to sift through a bunch of "fluff" and "tell me something I don't know" info to find the new stuff.

RealmsDM
12-26-2007, 10:26 PM
I have a feeling that companies like Paizo & Green Ronin will be sticking with 3.5 (and their material is just as good if not better than WotC)

And to prove our case (somewhat) I heard a rumor that the open gaming license/d20 experiment, will not carry over to 4.0

bastards! :mad:

Mulsiphix
12-26-2007, 10:34 PM
I heard a rumor that the open gaming license/d20 experiment, will not carry over to 4.0Your joking?! I thought D20 was separate from D&D. Does this mean that publishers will no longer be able to create content for D20 at all? Is D20 effectively dead? :confused:

Farcaster
12-27-2007, 02:20 AM
Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, 2nd Ed Revised - known as 2.5x (1995)

2.5? Never heard of it. I remember that there was a reprinting of the PHB and DMG, and there may have been some errata fixes in that, but it wasn't a new version. In fact, the editions were completely interchangeable, unlike 3rd vs. 3.5. Mostly, it was just a reprinting with new art.

Just to make sure my addled brain wasn't misremembering, I grabbed my 1995 printing of the PHB of the shelf. In the forward, it reads,

"Rest assured that this is still the same version of the AD&D game that your friends, classmates, and business partners have been playing for years.

Yes, there are some small and subtle changes in the rules, but you would have to read the whole book very carefully, and have a tremendous memory, to find them. (The changes are the sorts of minor corrections and clarifications we make every time we reprint ... " - Steve Winter, February 6, 1995.



I won't wait & see... I don't need to. I'm happy with 3.5, its detailed enough that you can create wonderful PCs/NPCs, and combat isn't all about suspending disbelief, its good enough for a game.

I agree that 3.5 is everything I need to run my D&D game, but there are some things that I would like streamlined. For one, I'd like it to be a lot simpler to make NPCs and advance monsters. Right now, it is kind of an involved process to enhance a monster from say 10HD to 25HD, with all of the attribute increases, feats, skills, and size categories. And even when you have a finished product, sometimes the advancement just doesn't work right to make it an appropriate challenge for the party -- at least without some further modifications. If they fix that, they'll have me hook line and sinker.

What I don't want is for them to make it like a MMPOG, and make class equality paramount in their design. For instance, having everyone in the party being able to heal themselves in some fashion? Or, by swinging his mace and scoring a critical hit, the cleric also heals a friend? It defies credulity. I know, I know. It's a roleplaying game. It doesn't have to be realistic, but I expect my fantasy game to operate within a certain set of established parameters. I suppose I will have to wait and see how they implement some of this, but if they are using some weak logic to bind it together and make it so that everyone can heal themselves... well, then, they've lost me.


Your joking?! I thought D20 was separate from D&D. Does this mean that publishers will no longer be able to create content for D20 at all? Is D20 effectively dead?

WotC does own the d20 product, this much is true. But, from the last official statement I read, there will be an OGL component of the 4e d20 framework. Unless someone can point you to an official statement that says otherwise, don't believe a word of it.

Mulsiphix
12-27-2007, 02:50 AM
"Rest assured that this is still the same version of the AD&D game that your friends, classmates, and business partners have been playing for years.I swear that is a line right out of their GenCon Indy 4E speech this year. I just saw that video on YouTube the other day.

gdmcbride
12-27-2007, 05:35 AM
2.5? Never heard of it. I remember that there was a reprinting of the PHB and DMG, and there may have been some errata fixes in that, but it wasn't a new version. In fact, the editions were completely interchangeable, unlike 3rd vs. 3.5. Mostly, it was just a reprinting with new art.

Just to make sure my addled brain wasn't misremembering, I grabbed my 1995 printing of the PHB of the shelf. In the forward, it reads,

"Rest assured that this is still the same version of the AD&D game that your friends, classmates, and business partners have been playing for years.


To quote Wikipedia:

"In 1995, the core rulebooks were slightly revised and a series of Player’s Option manuals were released as optional core rulebooks.Although still referred to by TSR as the 2nd Edition,this revision is seen by some fans as a distinct edition of the game and is sometimes referred to as AD&D 2.5."

So the core rulebooks were mostly the same. Where it really got different was the Player's Options manuals (where you could play custom built races that were so easy to screw over -- my class? Thief. My race? A race that has bonuses only for thieves). I'll agree that including it in the list of D&D editions is arguable. Of course, because everyone who wanted to play official D&D had to buy all their core books again in order to have the revisions (however slight), in some ways this "edition" does contribute to his point that D&D has had more than five versions.

Gary

gdmcbride
12-27-2007, 05:50 AM
I have a feeling that companies like Paizo & Green Ronin will be sticking with 3.5 (and their material is just as good if not better than WotC)

And to prove our case (somewhat) I heard a rumor that the open gaming license/d20 experiment, will not carry over to 4.0

bastards! :mad:

Paizo and Green Ronin will almost certainly convert to 4th edition.

Chris Pramas and Erik Mona are both a little miffed at STILL not receiving a 4th edition SRD. This is true. But ultimately, they will go where the money is. That will almost certainly be fourth edition. You may see sporadic older system releases (ala Goodman Game's release of a Gencon only 1st edition module) and there may spring up smaller companies to support the non-converters.

But 3.5 releases from major third party companies will almost certainly die sometime in the middle of 2008.

The rumor you heard (and it is pesky and persistent one) about the OGL is false. I can see why it exists though, the truth is somewhat complicated. d20 logos are going away.

To quote from ENWorld:



Big News! No d20 STL for 4E! D&D Brand Manager Scott Rouse has confiirmed unequivocably that there will be no d20 System Trademark License for 4th edition. "There will be the OGL and Wizards D&D products period. No d20 STL (tiered or otherwise) to be even more clear." Note that the Open Gaming License will still be around (which allows for third party products) - the d20 STL deals with the logo usage only. Scott adds that "We are looking to incorporate some sort of compatibility language within the new version of the OGL. Something like "Compatible with the 4th Edition of the Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying game..."

WotC has confirmed that the OGL will continue to be supported, and that there will be a 4E SRD.

When will we see the SRD? "July 2008 at the latest but some publishers will get it early so they can develop products in advance."


Gary

gdmcbride
12-27-2007, 05:56 AM
My own attitude towards 4th edition is this 'reply hazy -- ask later'. It is very hard to have opinion about a product that does not yet exist. I will almost certainly buy the three core rulebooks. It will take incredibly bad buzz to stop that.

I will buy it. I will read it. Then I will have an opinion.

What I won't buy is the $40 worth of advertising 'preview books'. When I buy a RPG book, I want to actually game with it. Not be told about games I may someday play.

Gary

Drohem
12-27-2007, 12:05 PM
The Player's Options series is commonly referred to as 2.5 AD&D. I didn't use them, but another GM in our group ran a campaign with the Player's Options books. It had some interesting stuff.

Personally, I like 3.5 D&D. If you don't use all the wackado books and stick to the core and Complete Series, then it's a great revision and solid system.

I am not impressed with Stars Wars: Saga Edition changes. SWSE is the testing ground for 4e D&D.

I am a complusive person and RPG collector, so I will probably get the core 4e books. More than likely, I will try to purchase them used since I rarely buy new books anymore due to excessive costs.

However, if WotC is going to make me buy a subscription to get some 4e materials, then I probably will only get the books for my complusive collecting and never fully utilize them in actual game play. Like I said, I am not impressed with SWSE changes from d20 Star Wars, and, consequently, 3.5 D&D.

Farcaster
12-27-2007, 12:39 PM
The Player's Options series is commonly referred to as 2.5 AD&D.

I must not have traveled in the right circles, because although I had heard of the Player's Options stuff, I had never heard it referred to as 2.5. Of course, I never allowed them in my games, nor did any game I played in use them. But, then again, at the time, I didn't let anyone use any materials that I didn't personally own -- which excluded all of the Complete Handbooks as well...

To this day, I favor a basically core game.

Mulsiphix
12-27-2007, 12:52 PM
I apologize but I still don't quite understand enough about D20 to process the information gdmcbride quoted and posted. So there will be D20 products but they just won't be called D20 anymore? Companies can still produce under the D20 system (OGL/SRD licenses?) but they'll just be marked as whatever Wizards decides to call the 4E D20 system? For example: Dungeon Crawl #60; Compatible with the 4th Edition of the Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying game...

gdmcbride
12-27-2007, 12:53 PM
To this day, I favor a basically core game.

There is a good reason to have your attitude.

Right now, hundreds of gaming groups are finishing up their playtest packages for D&D 4.0 core. Dozens and dozens of sessions of in house playtesting preceded it. Hundreds of hours of in house meetings preceded that. All for just three books.

They will still need errata.

No supplement will get anywhere near that level of discussion and testing. Maybe some inhouse playtesting if schedules permit. A couple of meetings. Editors. Bang. Off to the printers.

Gary

gdmcbride
12-27-2007, 01:09 PM
I apologize but I still don't quite understand enough about D20 to process the information gdmcbride quoted and posted. So there will be D20 products but they just won't be called D20 anymore? Companies can still produce under the D20 system (OGL/SRD licenses?) but they'll just be marked as whatever Wizards decides to call the 4E D20 system? For example: Dungeon Crawl #60; Compatible with the 4th Edition of the Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying game...

I empathize with your confusion. As I said, its a little complicated.

There will be no d20 logo per se. Almost everyone believes that because of the glut of crap during the initial D&D 3.0 release, this logo is the touch of death in the market. Paizo has already stopped using it.

It is this piece of information (misunderstood) that keeps alive the rumor -- d20 is dying! The OGL is over! WOTC is eating babies!

But third party products will still be produced under the Open Gaming License (OGL). They will probably have the text "Compatible with the 4th edition..." on them but that is not yet finalized. Scout Rouse, the Marketing Direction of WOTC who favors that language, still has to convince the legal department of Hasbro that this text won't make Jesus cry.

To the consumer, all of this really means very little. Yes, third party books will still be available. The logo and legal language will be slightly different. Remember that page of legal crap at the back of all your d20 books you never read? That will be different. Yay.

At the end of the day Green Ronin, Paizo, Necromancer Games, Goodman Games, etc. etc. etc will continue to produce D&D compatible books. They will be obviously D&D compatible books. They will have D&D compatible stats in them.

All is well.

Gary

Mulsiphix
12-27-2007, 01:18 PM
*HUGE SIGH OF RELIEF* Thank you for clearing that up for me. :D

Drohem
12-27-2007, 01:28 PM
I must not have traveled in the right circles, because although I had heard of the Player's Options stuff, I had never heard it referred to as 2.5. Of course, I never allowed them in my games, nor did any game I played in use them. But, then again, at the time, I didn't let anyone use any materials that I didn't personally own -- which excluded all of the Complete Handbooks as well...

To this day, I favor a basically core game.

That's pretty much my sentiments as well. Back at that time frame, TSR was producing a glut of books for 2nd AD&D. I swore off purchasing new 2nd AD&D books because I felt like I was being milked for my cash by TSR.

Funny, I got that same old feeling again with Hasbro/WotC with 3.5 D&D. I also have this funny tickle on the base of my neck that 4e D&D is going to be the same. ;)

RealmsDM
12-27-2007, 08:09 PM
I'm not sure that 3.5 will die that early McBride. I just think that not hype isnt the same as it was when 3e hit the shelves. Most people wanted & were extremely eager for 3e, but 4e just doesnt have that following. Hell, the poll on paizo has something like 45% of people saying that they're sticking with 3.5 as long as possible, and the abundance of material for that edition makes that very easy. Supply & demand- WotC will be pushing 4e like crack, but other companies will cash in on 3.5 leftovers for as long as possible.

my 2 cents...

rabkala
12-27-2007, 08:22 PM
Although still referred to by TSR as the 2nd Edition,this revision is seen by some fans as a distinct edition of the game and is sometimes referred to as AD&D 2.5
I think it's a more recent thing. I played with many players scattered throughout my state in home games, shops, and cons. It was just the Players Option books for years after 2e died and I never heard it referred to 2.5e. The first time I saw such a mention was online after 3.5e was released.

My holdout 2e group got into numerous fights over those option books!


Wrong again:

Shadowrun
1989 - 2007, 4th Edition
Call Of Cthulhu
1981 - 2007, 6th Edition (editions 1 - 5 were all approximately 3 years apart)
Vampire The Masquerade
1991 - 2004, 2nd Edition (1998, revised edition referred to by fans as 3rd ed)
Rifts
1990 - 2007, 1st Edition (2005, Ultimate Edition - not 2nd ed or a revision)

The reason for this is that D&D is and always has been the best product in the eyes of the masses. There are many who would like to argue that point, but sometimes the truth hurts. Those other games would not even exist if not for the few disgruntled/castoff D&D players who wanted/needed something different.
D&D can produce many supplements and be profitable because they have so many fans who do want/beg/cry for more. Other game systems can barely make a profit with their core books, so why would they go out on a limb and lose money. D&D has so many players/fans that they can get feedback. They can find areas where the game needs improvement/streamlining and make another addition which will also be profitable. Other systems do not have that luxury.

Digital Arcanist
12-27-2007, 09:40 PM
My own attitude towards 4th edition is this 'reply hazy -- ask later'. It is very hard to have opinion about a product that does not yet exist. I will almost certainly buy the three core rulebooks. It will take incredibly bad buzz to stop that.

I will buy it. I will read it. Then I will have an opinion.

What I won't buy is the $40 worth of advertising 'preview books'. When I buy a RPG book, I want to actually game with it. Not be told about games I may someday play.

Gary

You a wise and level-headed man Gary. I have ordered the PHB and DMG for these books and from the snippets I've read there will be a lot of changes I will adopt in my 3.5 campaigns. Since the game doesn't exist as Gary pointed out, to say "I will never change," is tantamount to ordering a big helping of crow.

Ranting about the economic model WotC has chosen isn't very productive and it seems that most people haven't even read the information WotC has distributed about 4th edition. We need to share information about the new changes instead of just curse a corporation for wanting to turn a profit.

Mulsiphix
12-27-2007, 09:54 PM
I admit that generally WOTC leaves a bad taste in my mouth, much like Microsoft. You won't catch me not using Windows or not buying even more MTG cards when new editions/versions are released. I just wish that legitimate interest in product improvement was more of a driving force than turning a profit. I know that such thinking is flawed as nobody would desire pursuing, nor have the financial resources available to do so, product improvement if it wasn't a profitable path to follow. In the end I will eat what WOTC gives me and house rule my way to happiness. The last thing I want to see is D&D get old, outdated, and once again (like right before TSR was about to declare bankruptcy) on the verse of loosing its fan base. I must remember that in the end I am a far better consumer than an idealist :D

fmitchell
12-27-2007, 11:13 PM
D&D can produce many supplements and be profitable because they have so many fans who do want/beg/cry for more. Other game systems can barely make a profit with their core books, so why would they go out on a limb and lose money. D&D has so many players/fans that they can get feedback. They can find areas where the game needs improvement/streamlining and make another addition which will also be profitable. Other systems do not have that luxury.

D&D is definitely the 800 lb gorilla, but I think you're exaggerating here. While running a game company is a labor of love, there are enough that also make enough to thrive: White Wolf, Steve Jackson Games (albeit more on Munchkin), apparently even Palladium. (Green Ronin, Goodman Games, etc. are a given, since they're part of the D&D ecology.) A lot of game companies have closed in recent years, with competition from computer games and the effects of various social forces, but D&D's competitors are still hanging in there.

Lots of companies solicit and receive feedback, and issue errata or alternate rules ... especially now in the Internet age. These days, a company can run a message board, or monitor other message boards, to get a feel for how their players like (or dislike) their game. They can issue errata on the web, and supplements on PDF ... or queue them up for a new edition. GURPS has supplement upon supplement, as does the Hero System ... never mind the Palladium System. Chaosium produces plenty of Cthulhu adventures and add-ons, despite being four guys and a lot of freelancers.

So, veering back to the topic, WotC is merely engaging in the same process that smaller companies do. With its huge presence and high volume, though, WotC's decisions are being scrutinized, analyzed, extrapolated, and exaggerated far more than, say, Steve Jackson Games or even White Wolf. Their current tack might be bad marketing, or merely the price of being the 800 lb gorilla in the market where you have to sell, sell, sell to keep yourself on top (and to keep your corporate masters happy).

Xaels Greyshadow
12-27-2007, 11:38 PM
Here is the source link for any and all information put out by WoTC regarding 4E.

http://forums.gleemax.com/forumdisplay.php?f=693

For me, I have enough information to have made a decision that I just won't be purchasing 4E as it begins flowing from the presses this comming june. If I have to purchase a DMG or PHB to play in a game or DM for that matter at some point in time, then I will have successfully been forced to by the powers that be. For now I am going to focus on the last 9 needed books to complete a published ruleset library and stick with it as long as possible. I have a good understanding of economics and corporate survival and have given my share and gotten fair value in return. Hopefully they will be doing something spectacular that will ooooh and aaaaahhh me into wanting to have another complete collection, but right now I only feel as if my pocketbook is being manipulated for something that I already own and to me, isn't broken or even bent in any way. Ultimately, as a DM I have the power to tell players whatever I want, we call them, House Rules. I have played with a totally awesome DM that would only allow you to do something if you could describe what you wanted to do. IE, if you were a Rogue and wanted to pick the lock on a door, you had to tell him what you would use for a pick, and have at least some basic knowledge of how a lock worked. If you were a spellcaster and didn't know what spell components were part of the spell you were alledging to be casting, spell failure. It's just me, but WoTC has told me repeatedly in each and every book I have purchased over the last 3 years now that if something seems not to work, D20, OGL, House Rules and what not that I have the power to change the rule to suit my games need. Therefore, I just can't see needing any further additions to play and have fun as ultimately I, as DM am the rule maker, rule authority and final decision maker for my game as you all for yours and I am a believer that there will always be, as there is now, a small group of people that will jump at the chance to play or learn with the 3.5 ruleset. Personally, I'm looking for a first edition game to play in so I can challange my mind with some THAC0. Maybe play in Ptolus with 1st Ed rules ? Anyone ? Anyone ?

Mulsiphix
12-28-2007, 01:15 AM
Maybe play in Ptolus with 1st Ed rules ? Anyone ? Anyone ?:eek::eek::eek: *Tries not to lurch forth his dinner* :eek::eek::eek:

Such a pure 3.X product... Ptolus IS 3.X. To play it under any other rule set would be heresy! BLASPHEMY! Please don't smear the mastermind work of Monte Cook with such a suggestion. If there was a 3.X bible, Ptolus would be it.

Skunkape
12-28-2007, 08:37 AM
Well, I for one am not surprised that we're getting another edition of DnD. I don't think the current one is broken, and am not sure what they'll be doing with the next one, but I do know that none of the people I game with will be switching.

I also know that when my current campaign comes to an end, roughly in a couple of years (yes I usually do long running campaigns), I'll probably start using the current (as in the one just released), edition of RuneQuest, with lots of homebrew rules thrown in.

But while 4.0 might be a better system, I'm sure it'll be quite a while before we switch, if we ever do.

Mulsiphix
12-28-2007, 12:14 PM
The 3.X system not being broken seems to be the number one thing people cite for not wanting to switch to 4.0. Just checked out several threads over at the D&D forums which, more or less, resemble the discussion in this thread to a tee.

InfoStorm
12-28-2007, 04:12 PM
My primary reason that I will not be switching is one of those same economics that makes WotC want to produce a new product they want people to buy. MONEY. When 3rd edition came out, I had been judging D&D at Gencon for a couple years, and judged for 3 more years under the new rules. I played 2nd edition a lot before then, but only because that's what my players were wanting. Until my group of players then, I was still playing with the BASIC D&D ruleset. Why, I liked that world setting (as stated in other threads) and our style was a lot more Role-playing than anything else. Our favorite session was one where we never pulled out the dice, yet played for 6 hours. Seriously move the plot along though.

What got me into D&D 3rd more than anything else? No, it wasn't the free PHB & DMG I got for judging 10 slots that year at Gencon, it was other people who were able to play with the new rules.

Since then, I've done the foolish thing of getting married, a mortgage, and a kid. No more free money for books. I've actually only BOUGHT 2 books in the last 3 years, all of the rest have been presents for birthdays and Christmas. Makes easy shopping for family members and Santa. With the new ruleset, I won't be buying it, and I will probably not ask for it, because I've now got a list of books similar to, though not as large as Xaels's and I like them. They aren't perfect, but they work. I don't worry about exploits or weaknessed in the rules. I watch them, and if players use them, so do I. Do we use the rules perfectally, no. Sorta like the Pirates Code, "They aren't really rules, they are more like guidelines."

As long as we have fun, I really don't care what ruleset is in use. It just a matter of finances now. If the new rules really do speed up combat, sO what, we enjoy our combats, and I frankly don't see how we can speed it up much more in our games. You still need to let everyone act, and they can't all speak at the table at the same time. Still have to roll to hit and for damage, or is all damage going to me like the miniatures battles, multiple of 5?

I guess what all my ranting is saying is, "I won't be upgrading to 4.0 because I'm already having enough fun with what I have invested a lot of time and money into and I don't have the money to leave a lot of those books behind for the new rules."

Opinion: I don't care WHAT they say about forward compatibility, a HUGE portion of what they have published in 3.x is going to become useless paper in relation to 4th, and I'm not that eager to put my 3.x books in the storage room next to my 2nd ed books.

Mulsiphix
12-28-2007, 05:20 PM
One of the things that initially had my feathers ruffled is that I had just got into D&D a few months ago. I had been trying to choose a single game system to learn and play and did quite a bit of research on D&D. I absolutely fell in love with so much D20 content that I ultimately decided D&D was the first game system I was going to learn. With 4E just around the corner it seems like so many of the D20 things I fell in love with will soon be useless to most gamers. After talking more with other DM's, especially on this forum, I realize the rule setting is as important as I once thought. As long as I can find players who don't mind house rules or a hybrid of 3.X/4E I should be set :D

Olothfaern
12-29-2007, 01:58 AM
... if I was just getting into it I'd be reluctant to switch, and unless you have SOTA gamers you won't need to for awhile. I know people who are still happy with 2nd ed + house rules. Whatever floats your boat. I was in a playtest group for 3.0, and I've pretty much done everything I wanted to do with the rules set (except play a crazy multipouncing Warblade / Wizard / Telflammar Shadowlord / Jade Pheonix Mage [I still have six months...]). Even that isn't for the power; at this point my last eight months I've been playing for kitsch. Weird combos and such. But as I said in my previous post, I'm looking forward to the new obstacles/challenges.

Then again I have access to "Go Go Gadget Corporate bookstore", so I can just 'check out' the titles I want to use and buy the ones I need and a good discount.

rabkala
12-29-2007, 02:11 AM
Then again I have access to "Go Go Gadget Corporate bookstore", so I can just 'check out' the titles I want to use and buy the ones I need and a good discount.
So for a slight cut, we should forward our wishlists to you...

Grinnen Baeritt
12-29-2007, 05:42 AM
my first thought... wait till 4.5.:rolleyes:

Trust me it WILL happen.

The big difference here is, that list of 3.5 products, well, chances are they will all be made for 4.0. (Most probably existed in a slightly different format for Ad&D editions as well). And chances are someone will buy them all and when the revised edition (a.k.a. 4.5) hits the streets an identical post will be made.

I'm fairly fortunate that I tend only to buy a single core RULEBOOK (I haven't bothered buying ANY 3.5 products...I just use the SRDs available on the web). Then simply adapt background stuff from other systems/editions. I refuse to be spoonfed the same stuff in a slightly different format just to make money for a corporation. Besides they will make enough money from the new blood that will be drawn in by 4.0, why do they need mine.

What I do dislike is the apparent lack of proof reading and playtesting that allows new books to require Addenda and errata days after the release.

I've finally got a copy of Star Wars Saga, it is easier (and better than the previous version) but it does have errata sheets published for it already...and web content for the tech specialst, which was included in the previous version!

As I didn't invest a great deal of anything but time in 3.5 it really doesn't bother me about the system changes. If it is anything like SW Saga then I will buy the Core PHB...and probably only that.

rabkala
12-29-2007, 10:56 AM
I played in a game where the DM was unfamiliar with the large amounts of errata, so they played with the books as they were.

My cleric used Divine Meta-magic munchkinism, Persistent spell brokenness, and power-gaming optimization to completely own everything. My Cleric could easily dispatch encounters anywhere near our EL single handedly. After a couple months, it wasn't even fun anymore. I finally broke down and printed off all the errata for them, then scrapped my character in favor of an underpowered half-elven bard just to have some fun.

I also wonder how so much nonsense and mistakes can get through in a professional product. You know the optimization boards at Wizards will be buzzing with all the new 4e loopholes to exploit within days of the release.

Mulsiphix
12-29-2007, 11:50 AM
I can't believe the errata that is published for any given product in general. Every tech book I buy has tons of errata on the publishers website. Any game books I buy have errata, any strategy guides I buy for games have errata, and even the occasional novel has errata. How in the hell do these things get published with so many mistakes or overlooked balancing issues? Isn't this what editors are paid to prevent?

Grinnen Baeritt
12-29-2007, 11:53 AM
I also wonder how so much nonsense and mistakes can get through in a professional product. You know the optimization boards at Wizards will be buzzing with all the new 4e loopholes to exploit within days of the release.

Please refer to the Bill Gates "Making Money for Dummies" guide..*

* obviously the Vista Version which prevents access to help files from older software saying that the required .hlp file is unstable......but then allows you to download the required file and then it works fine! :rolleyes:

fmitchell
12-29-2007, 12:49 PM
I can't believe the errata that is published for any given product in general. Every tech book I buy has tons of errata on the publishers website. Any game books I buy have errata, any strategy guides I buy for games have errata, and even the occasional novel has errata. How in the hell do these things get published with so many mistakes or overlooked balancing issues? Isn't this what editors are paid to prevent?

I suspect the problem is lack of time, coupled with a traditional publishing cycle in which printing and shipping books takes a month or more. Especially if a company is trying to hustle out books as quickly as possible, errors are bound to creep in. (Mongoose also had one editor who'd simply ignore playtest notes and reported errors. That editor was sacked ... but maybe there are more ...)

The Pragmatic Programmers (http://www.pragprog.com), as part of their publishing process, test all the source code examples in their books, but that's comparatively rare. Translating this process to gaming is an exercise for the reader.

Some strategies from The Pragmatic Programmers that game companies and others might pursue include:


Release "Beta Books" on PDF that are the proofs of books in progress, with a promise of getting a dead tree book at the end. (Edition Zero of Basic Roleplaying is halfway there.)

Allow purchasers to submit errata easily, especially during the "beta book" cycle, and allow anyone to view the errata list on the web ... including items that have not yet been reviewed.

Allow purchasers to download corrected PDF books for free. Getting a new dead tree version is a bit much, but a convenient printout of the errata would be nice, especially if the errata and book format were conducive to clipping/taping errata items on the page(s) they affect.

gdmcbride
12-29-2007, 06:38 PM
I'm not sure that 3.5 will die that early McBride. I just think that not hype isnt the same as it was when 3e hit the shelves. Most people wanted & were extremely eager for 3e, but 4e just doesnt have that following. Hell, the poll on paizo has something like 45% of people saying that they're sticking with 3.5 as long as possible, and the abundance of material for that edition makes that very easy. Supply & demand- WotC will be pushing 4e like crack, but other companies will cash in on 3.5 leftovers for as long as possible.

my 2 cents...

You may be right. We are both guessing.

My money though isn't on 3.5 hold outs. People love new shiny toys. No older edition of D&D has ever generated a sustainable "older edition" market. There have been a few nostalgia products, yes. A few hobby level companies (ala Pied Piper Publishing). But serious product lines? Not that I've seen.

Maybe 4th edition will be the first. Ask me again after Gencon next year. Then my opinion will not be based on conjecture.

Gary

gdmcbride
12-29-2007, 06:55 PM
I can't believe the errata that is published for any given product in general. Every tech book I buy has tons of errata on the publishers website. Any game books I buy have errata, any strategy guides I buy for games have errata, and even the occasional novel has errata. How in the hell do these things get published with so many mistakes or overlooked balancing issues? Isn't this what editors are paid to prevent?

I think you give the reason in your own post. "Every tech book I BUY has tons of errata..." (emphasis mine). Even with problems, you still buy the book.

Playtesting takes time and effort. Thorough playtesting takes INSANE amounts of time and effort. Game book publishers believe it doesn't sell books. If publishers are wrong about this, they are all wrong.

Playtesting happens, don't get me wrong. But playtesting is the only part of book publishing that is almost all volunteer. Companies pay (almost) nothing for it. And they are often cutting the playtesting to speed up production cycles. "We are a week behind in layout ... don't worry we can make it up in playtesting..." I have heard this sentence more than once.

Mongoose has done well the last few years and are often cited as a company with terrible editing/playtesting regimes. Some insist they've gotten better. Maybe so.

Some one should start a company that advertises, "100% playtested material! Over one thousand hours of playtesting went into this book!" Then we would have a concrete counter example. Of course, these books will cost more. I guess my question to you is: would you pay a lot more for a seriously playtested book? How much more?

Gary

Mulsiphix
12-29-2007, 09:33 PM
I guess my question to you is: would you pay a lot more for a seriously playtested book? How much more?Depends on the book. A+ Training Certification? Yes I'd happily pay an additional $20 to know everything in it was up to par with the current tests. HTML training book? Probably not since it isn't that crucial and I'll easily pick up the changes in the communities I am a part of. Game System Books? I would for the core rulebooks without a doubt and would be willing to pay twice as much for them. If I'm reading a 300 - 400 page book to learn a complex system I would really like to make sure the info I am getting is pure and tested when I learn it. Optional supplements that add optional rules? Nope. In my opinion most optional rules usually have balancing issues with the core rule sets anyway. Cookbook? I'd happily pay more to make sure my recipes are tested and proven delicious. For me it just depends on how important or technical the material is.

gdmcbride
12-30-2007, 12:12 AM
Optional supplements that add optional rules? Nope. In my opinion most optional rules usually have balancing issues with the core rule sets anyway.

This attitude is precisely why no one playtests supplements. It's why the 4th edition core rulebooks will almost certainly be a coherent, solid system (whether you like it or not) and the 4e supplements will have broken rules that allow you to again create Pun-Pun-esque screws. Playtesting supplements gets you no money so why do it?

I'm not saying its bad or good. It's just the way things are.

But the next time you try to run a pre-published adventure and find an encounter completely over powered or poorly balanced, wonder why no longer. It's because that adventure has not been playtested.

Gary

Mulsiphix
12-30-2007, 12:42 AM
But the next time you try to run a pre-published adventure and find an encounter completely over powered or poorly balanced, wonder why no longer. It's because that adventure has not been playtested.I understand. I just can't imagine publishing something I haven't even play tested. To me that is like writing a programming language book, full of examples, that have never actually been compiled and tested to verify they work the way the text describes it to.

rabkala
12-30-2007, 01:04 AM
I understand. I just can't imagine publishing something I haven't even play tested. To me that is like writing a programming language book, full of examples, that have never actually been compiled and tested to verify they work the way the text describes it to.
It is because they blindly trust that a Monte Cook (Or insert designer name here) will produce something close to passable, that will be bought in a feeding frenzy of wonderful profit bliss.

Mulsiphix
12-30-2007, 01:13 AM
Touche ;)

Drohem
12-30-2007, 01:16 AM
Unfortunately, I agree that the phoenix of Pun-Pun will rise again under 4e. :rolleyes:

Digital Arcanist
12-30-2007, 01:54 PM
Cookbook? I'd happily pay more to make sure my recipes are tested and proven delicious. For me it just depends on how important or technical the material is.

Cookbooks are written by chefs/cooks that make the recipes in their restaurants as a staple of the menu so no matter what the recipe is you know that the ingredients and processes required to make the dish will not be toxic or dangerous. Whether or not they taste good to you is subjective and therefore the writer doesn't really care about you opinion because someone else will love the dish. There is a place called America's Test Kitchen that tests all the variations on recipes to find the best mixture and then publishes it in a video format as well as a book. They often spend weeks testing an individual recipe and days testing cookware and methods of cooking. As you can imagine this level of testing will be costly and not profitable in another industry.

There is also the human factor which it appears many people are not adding into their equations. It seems people are quick to blame the rules being broken when on many occasion I have found that it is their understanding of the rule that is broken. I have been a victim/perpetrator of this act myself. I have extensive education in the English language and when I read a sentence sometimes I interpret it differently than the writer. That's fine for poetry but not so much for an instructional manual. I've found instances in the the Planar Handbook, Manual of the Planes, and the Fiend Folio errata where the new stuff reads exactly the same as the old to me. This indicates that it is not a change in the rule but a clarification based on reader misunderstanding.

Mulsiphix
12-30-2007, 01:58 PM
I had no idea about America's Test Kitchen. That is extremely cool. I agree that the human factor is a huge reason why something may appear to be broken but the fact that the original authors or publishing company officially releases errata is proof that most things are.

Bloodwyrm
01-02-2008, 07:30 PM
3.5 All They Way I Have All but a few books and i love it 4E Eat your heart out!!!

rabkala
01-02-2008, 08:20 PM
D&D additions are like the opposite sex. We really like them when they are fresh, new, and tight. Sometimes, we even think we love them! Now just imagine having to stay with that old worn out game for 10, 20 or 30 years. Now, when they start prancing around a really tight newer model, how are you going to feel? You will definitely begin to question your love for that old, worn out, smelly version that has been just lying around your house doing nothing for years. :cool:

Riftwalker
01-02-2008, 08:28 PM
D&D additions are like the opposite sex. We really like them when they are fresh, new, and tight. Sometimes, we even think we love them! Now just imagine having to stay with that old worn out game for 10, 20 or 30 years. Now, when they start prancing around a really tight newer model, how are you going to feel? You will definitely begin to question your love for that old, worn out, smelly version that has been just lying around your house doing nothing for years. :cool:

Yes but a relationship on the side with a new edition could end in a divorce with the older edition. If that happens you lose half your money! :D

rabkala
01-02-2008, 08:30 PM
You will definitely lose money! Bloodwyrm is still in that honeymoon phase.

ffclubhero
01-02-2008, 08:46 PM
For us experienced gamers, we understand that this is a cycle and, honestly, wotc has the best one... I've read these rants after 1st edition, after 2nd edition, after 3rd edition and they never get fresher and in two years all of these people are usually playing the system quit the game because they can't find players.

Games Workshop is like this, only worse. You have to buy new rules, and new miniature based armies. Just to get a core rulebook, army rules, an army you can put on a tabletop (don't forget paint!), will run you -to begin- about $150.

I was ticked when I found out WOTC was 'revising' the miniature rules, but, again, not as bad as having to revamp a WHOLE ARMY.

Digital Arcanist
01-03-2008, 01:18 AM
There is a lot of talk about WotC's "poor" business model and uncaring attitude but compared to Games Workshop, WotC is perfection.

You think its bad being a player, try being a seller of the game. They FORCE you to buy new editions and if you don't then they send you nasty letters from their lawyers telling you to stop selling the old crap. Worse yet, your minimum first order is $11K.

We should count our blessings.

Mulsiphix
01-03-2008, 01:30 AM
D&D additions are like the opposite sex. We really like them when they are fresh, new, and tight. Sometimes, we even think we love them! Now just imagine having to stay with that old worn out game for 10, 20 or 30 years. Now, when they start prancing around a really tight newer model, how are you going to feel? You will definitely begin to question your love for that old, worn out, smelly version that has been just lying around your house doing nothing for years. :cool:I agree that is the case for many long term relationships with quality modules that you grow out of over the years. However, there are some games in this life that one never really grows tired of. The kind that always seems to present new opportunities or continues to reinvent itself. The question in the end that most people need to ask themselves is, have you been playing the right game all of these years?

Mulsiphix
01-03-2008, 01:41 AM
There is a lot of talk about WotC's "poor" business model and uncaring attitude but compared to Games Workshop, WotC is perfection.

You think its bad being a player, try being a seller of the game. They FORCE you to buy new editions and if you don't then they send you nasty letters from their lawyers telling you to stop selling the old crap. Worse yet, your minimum first order is $11K.

We should count our blessings.No joke. I considered getting into Warhammer Fantasy or Warhammer 40K before even looking at D&D because I enjoyed the universe so much when I played video games that took place in the universe (Dawn Of War anybody?). WOTC is a clear, bright, and sunny day compared to the monsoon that Games Workshop is.

They won't let you compete in tournaments unless your miniaturs are PROPERLY painted and you have all the mini's needed for a particular battle. The miniatures are pretty damn expensive when you look at how many you need to buy to really be a part of the game. And unlike 3.5 which you can continue to play in many places, the mini lines get discontinued and are no longer allowed in tournaments and in a great deal of player hosted games. Its ridiculous.

Digital Arcanist
01-03-2008, 02:01 AM
Its like playing CCG's except its 3-5 dollars a card instead of 3-5 dollars for a pack of 14 cards.

I spent $350 on a full army and the supplies needed to prepare them only to be turned away from a tournament two months later because the new set came out.

That whole section of the gaming community is a nightmare to deal with and the worse part is that the game is a lot of fun.

Mulsiphix
01-03-2008, 03:25 AM
*shutters at the thought of the Games Worshop website where such behavior is portrayed as exciting and staying cutting edge*

Skunkape
01-03-2008, 11:44 AM
Its like playing CCG's except its 3-5 dollars a card instead of 3-5 dollars for a pack of 14 cards.

I spent $350 on a full army and the supplies needed to prepare them only to be turned away from a tournament two months later because the new set came out.

That whole section of the gaming community is a nightmare to deal with and the worse part is that the game is a lot of fun.

Actually, I don't mind not being able to compete in trounies, I'm perfectly happy playing with my Necrons with anyone who'll play against me. GW can keep releasing as many new versions of the rules and figures they want, but they best not expect me to purchase them if they don't peak my interest!:D

Digital Arcanist
01-03-2008, 07:23 PM
If you can find players for a nice game then I envy you greatly. Unfortunately, for me anyway, the war game community is dead and the4 nearest node is the bay area where players are butt-heads and everything is treated like a tournament.

I can't figure out why there is such a sense of elitism and in some case secretiveness. Its not like war gaming is some underground sport breaking international laws.

Mulsiphix
01-03-2008, 09:30 PM
If you can find players for a nice game then I envy you greatly. Unfortunately, for me anyway, the war game community is dead and the4 nearest node is the bay area where players are butt-heads and everything is treated like a tournament.

I can't figure out why there is such a sense of elitism and in some case secretiveness. Its not like war gaming is some underground sport breaking international laws.No kidding right? One of the reasons I hated playing with Matt (friend that introduced me to BattleTech) was he was so serious about it. He loved the carefree-ness I brought to the table but I often found the environment to be stuffy and lacking fun (atmosphere wise). Luckily BattleTech was amazing. I'm thinking about organizing some online play but not using MegaMek. I just can't stand that program for reasons I won't go into here. I miss wargaming with more than just one opponent. It takes the game to a whole new league of strategy.

Skunkape
01-04-2008, 08:42 AM
While I have run into the "butt-heads" that you mention, I don't ever play a game with them. I'm sorry, but if you get your panties in a bunch because I've got a partially painted army, which by the way, looks better than most of the "butt-heads'" armies, then I'll just find someone else to play against/with!:D

Also, while I like wargaming, I also like the model building/painting aspect behind building a Warhammer 40k army, so I'm almost as happy building/painting my figs. I've got quite a few pieces for a Space Marine army, but have yet to start them, because I couldn't at the time, find an army I liked the look of. When they finally came out with the Black Templars within like the last year or two, don't remember exactly and I finally found a look I like!

Do I have all of the right models for it? I don't know and don't really care!:D

If I can't get someone to play with, I'll still have some really great looking models.

ffclubhero
01-04-2008, 09:03 AM
On the other hand, in fairness to Xaels, that is ALOT of bread to have sunk into a game. I hope you get your books!

Mulsiphix
01-04-2008, 04:46 PM
I figured if I get into Warhammer I'll do it using a tool like MapTool where I can use tokens. I get great looking mini's, am able to play the game, can easily measure distances, and I don't have to dip into my savings to really get into the game.

Digital Arcanist
01-05-2008, 12:05 AM
I too find the painting aspect of the wargaming scene to be pleasant. I often relax by painting a miniature.

tesral
01-05-2008, 12:33 AM
I take this precious moment in time to throw out my 2 cents to the world as to why I will not switch to 4E. Maybe pick up an adventure here or there but will always convert it to 3.5.

Good for you. I think they have enough of your money dude.

tesral
01-05-2008, 12:34 AM
I too find the painting aspect of the wargaming scene to be pleasant. I often relax by painting a miniature.

SIGH! I used to, then my eyes got worse. Getting old sucks.

rabkala
01-05-2008, 01:10 AM
SIGH! I used to, then my eyes got worse. Getting old sucks.
Young whipper snappers bragging about their eyes. Mine fell out when I became a demi-lich, but you don't hear me complain.

Mulsiphix
01-05-2008, 01:46 AM
A lich doesn't need eyes. Anybody who has minions to do their bidding needs little in the way of physical extremities :p

Bloodwyrm
01-05-2008, 04:25 AM
Ill Try Playing 4E But Im Dead Set on 3.5 and will never abandon it but i Always give something new a try.

Skunkape
01-05-2008, 11:40 AM
SIGH! I used to, then my eyes got worse. Getting old sucks.

That's what reading glasses and magnifiers are for! Just make sure you don't try to dip the paint brush in the bottle of paint while looking through them though!:D

Digital Arcanist
01-05-2008, 01:31 PM
That's what reading glasses and magnifiers are for! Just make sure you don't try to dip the paint brush in the bottle of paint while looking through them though!:D

My grandfather retired as a dentist a few year back and he gave me a lot of his tools and his magnifying headgear. Often my roommates come in to see me painting a miniature or soldering a breadboard with my hideous headgear on and they just bust up laughing.

Mulsiphix
01-05-2008, 04:00 PM
Ill Try Playing 4E But Im Dead Set on 3.5 and will never abandon it but i Always give something new a try.The more that I am hearing about 4E the more I'm seeing things I definitely like. I'm positive that now I'll be running, at the very minimum, a mix of 3.5/4E rules. If enough of the 4E changes are acceptable I'll probably just full out convert. My how information changes the impulsive lynch mob that is human reaction.

tesral
01-05-2008, 05:26 PM
That's what reading glasses and magnifiers are for! Just make sure you don't try to dip the paint brush in the bottle of paint while looking through them though!:D

Oh, believe me, I have all that. I do a bit of modeling.

RealmsDM
01-06-2008, 07:18 PM
I was just reading the official post on critical hits in 4e... seems to me like they're just dumbing down a bunch of rules. All I keep hearing is how they "fixed" rules & "updated" others; not what I'm seeing....

Digital Arcanist
01-06-2008, 07:37 PM
They are simply streamlining the system in the attempt to get the current generation of kids to step away from their consoles and sit down at the table.

I think the majority of the current players will buy a PHB and DMG and integrate some new 4e rules with the 3.5 rules we know and love. There comes a point when you "streamline" too much and the game loses its appeal to us.

Now with Saga edition, the previous incarnation of the game was so bad that Saga is light years better than the old stuff.

The next big advance in D&D won't be 4.0 but rather 3.75!!!

RealmsDM
01-06-2008, 07:56 PM
yeah, I know their strategy & what's they're going for, but I hate how they're pushing it on us. we're not idiots, just call it for what it is...

I'm gonna hit up the bookstore & flip thru the 4e core books over a cup of coffee, but I doubt at this point there will be anything that entices me to throw it into my 3.5 campaign (maybe better aerial combat rules?)

As for Saga edition, I love star wars, & welcomed teh new version, since I hated every prior version of the rpg (jedi & sith just plain OWNED every other class...) and a single space battle (nothing epic) when properly run, could take all session....

Xaels Greyshadow
01-06-2008, 08:01 PM
I'm in the mad scramble to complete my collection. Picked up Dragon Magic for $6.50 on e-bay this weekend and Races of the Dragon for $7.50. Less than $30 for both books with shipping and fees included. 7 to go and 2 up and comming Eberron releases, one january and one february, then 4E will be completely upon me.:(

RealmsDM
01-06-2008, 08:11 PM
good idea... i TOTALLY forgot to start scoping Ebay for books I'd like to own. I have just about everything on pdf, and almost half the entire 3/3.5 line in hard copy, but hey, at $8 a pop, why not?

Mulsiphix
01-06-2008, 10:47 PM
The next big advance in D&D won't be 4.0 but rather 3.75!!!Preach it! I think the D&D community would crap its pants with happiness if such a thing were to even be hinted.

Mulsiphix
01-06-2008, 10:51 PM
yeah, I know their strategy & what's they're going for, but I hate how they're pushing it on us. we're not idiots, just call it for what it is...Seriously. When I watch their speeches and read their articles I wonder who in the hell they're trying to fool. The people they're talking to right now are the old D&D users who know and love the game the way it is. Every time they talk they try to use "buzz" words and phrases to try and get us excited about a product nobody has ever seen before. I just don't get their marketing campaign. Either they could care less about their current user base or they are forgetting the majority of it is composed of highly intelligent people who can see right through their marketing hype. Either way I find it disgusting.

Drohem
01-06-2008, 11:13 PM
Seriously. When I watch their speeches and read their articles I wonder who in the hell they're trying to fool. The people they're talking to right now are the old D&D users who know and love the game the way it is. Every time they talk they try to use "buzz" words and phrases to try and get us excited about a product nobody has ever seen before. I just don't get their marketing campaign. Either they could care less about their current user base or they are forgetting the majority of it is composed of highly intelligent people who can see right through their marketing hype. Either way I find it disgusting.

Can I get an amen brothers! :)

tesral
01-07-2008, 01:19 AM
Can I get an amen brothers! :)

AMEN Brothers! PREACH IT!

Yea, been there done that, out grew the t-shirt (sideways). I could see the point behind second edition, First edition was organized like a medieval library, that is to say, not organized. Third Ed while a fairly drastic departure, did correct many things that sorely needed correcting. It and 3.5 also make a few mistakes IMHO that were not there before, and left at least one glaring problem that should have been dealt with.

However there comes a point when the product or technology is mature. That is any further change is change for the sake of change. D&D does not need yet another drastic re-write. It does not need to fork into a complex and a simple form. The D&D AD&D fork sucked life out of TSR.

4ed is a marketing ploy. A means to get you to buy all the books yet again. Change for the sake of change for all that I can see as of this time.

I am afraid they will kil lthe golden goose trying to get it to molt so often.

Mulsiphix
01-07-2008, 02:26 AM
It and 3.5 also make a few mistakes IMHO that were not there before, and left at least one glaring problem that should have been dealt with.What is this glaring problem you think resides in/with 3.5?

gdmcbride
01-07-2008, 02:58 AM
What is this glaring problem you think resides in/with 3.5?

Though you did not ask me, I think D&D 3.5 is far from perfect. Several things that I find deeply flawed:

1. The Diplomacy Skill -- a character focused on diplomacy can easily become obnoxious.

2. Prep Time -- monsters are so detailed and so complex that if you stat them out using the rules as written, it can take hours. Mostly, of course, I never did this. I used either premade monsters or just winged it. But, I could see how neither of these methods are perfect solutions.

3. Dependence on Boring Magic Items -- Your character benefits from having lots of magic items that raise stats (belts of strength, gloves of dex, etc.), raise saves, raise your focused skills and raise AC via deflection bonuses. Those items were so cool and effective, it almost never made any sense to waste time on any other wondrous items. I want more MAGIC in D&D's magic items.

4. The Five Minutes of Action and Rest Problem -- Once the spellcasters have burned all their spells in the first big fight, it makes sense for them to stop and rest. The party is more powerful if you go into every fight with the spellcasters fully charged. This encourages a style of play that I do not like.

5. Complex Conditions -- Quick, what is the difference between stunned, staggered, dazzled, shaken, fatigured, fascinated, nauseated, sickened, dazed and confused? Can you tell me what they do without looking it up? I can't. So I have to stop and look them up. Every time. I hate that. A good DM screen can help, but there are so many conditions its hard to fit them all without using a miniscule font.

6. Complex Attack of Opportunity Rules -- Does applying an oil provoke an AoA? Does sundering an item lying at another persons feet? What if he picks it up? Using a spell-like ability? An extraordinary ability? A supernatural ability? Drawing a weapon? Sheathing a weapon? Dismounting a horse? Can you answer without looking them up? Again, I can't. AoAs might have been a good idea, but they are out of hand in 3.5. This complexity gains me nothing in game save for delays as we once more look it up. I want either simpler rules or for them to go away.

Anyways, I'm sure that's not all. But its what came to mind off the top of my head.

Gary

Maelstrom
01-07-2008, 05:21 AM
7) Grappling - Attack of opportunity, touch attack, grapple check, and then its a whole new set of rules once you are in a grapple. I would normally just ignore it unless absolutely needed, but half the monsters use it as a main part of their abilities. Getting to know the rules well isn't so bad, but when you have something this complex everyone at the table has a different interperetation of the rules, and you just get bogged down.

8) Static combat - With attacks of opportunity in place and the rules that you can't move to make a full attack, once the PCs get locked in combat you're not very encouraged to move around and make combat more interesting (unless you've invested heavily in tumble).

On the marketing of the Wizards staff...

Maybe what the problem is is that they are overhyping it. Perhaps its a good system that slims down the complexity enough that you can enjoy the game more. Some may enjoy its new style, some may not. So much annoyance coming from the people before the public has even seen it in action. Call me a fanboy if you will, but I'm just taking the wait and see attitude.

You don't have to buy into the system... Wizards is a company and if you don't buy their new product then maybe they'll realize they have to split D&D into two alternate approaches to continue to survive. Your money is what will talk to them. If they don't split, you'll still have enough 3.5 resources available to keep your table running for a long time from your current library or from ebay as some people sell all their old stuff to get into the new system.

Malruhn
01-07-2008, 06:55 AM
It is my fervent wish that when 4.0 comes out, all the 3.5 stuff will lose all of its monetary value and I can finish my paper library of D&D books for realistic amounts of money... well, realistic for a guy with two car notes, a mortgage, and a wife and three kids to feed and clothe.

gdmcbride
01-07-2008, 07:21 AM
It is my fervent wish that when 4.0 comes out, all the 3.5 stuff will lose all of its monetary value and I can finish my paper library of D&D books for realistic amounts of money... well, realistic for a guy with two car notes, a mortgage, and a wife and three kids to feed and clothe.

Your wish is already starting to come true. Selected D&D 3.5 stuff is being slashed at places like Amazon already.

Races of Destiny $3.16
Weapons of Legacy $7.76
Magic of Incarnum $3.06
Unearthed Arcana $3.05
Eberron Explorer's Handbook $1.99

I'm sure there are other deals, if one cares to look.

Gary

Mulsiphix
01-07-2008, 10:02 AM
4. The Five Minutes of Action and Rest Problem -- Once the spellcasters have burned all their spells in the first big fight, it makes sense for them to stop and rest. The party is more powerful if you go into every fight with the spellcasters fully charged. This encourages a style of play that I do not like.How would you suggest fixing this problem though? Isn't camping necessary for those who need to "recharge" or "catch their breath" before moving on?

rabkala
01-07-2008, 10:55 AM
There is no real good way to fix that problem without imposing things upon the characters artificially. Especially as the players get more experienced with access to all sorts of things like teleport, word of recall, plane shift, Leomunds secure shelter, limited wish, etc. it is difficult to force them to continue. Every once in awhile you can make dungeons that they can't teleport out of or pocket dimensions they are trapped in, but too much of that will seem very heavy handed. As a DM and player I have seen many groups push it just a little too far, then disaster strikes.

The new spell system in 4e could definitely help fix the problem if done decently.

gdmcbride
01-07-2008, 01:16 PM
How would you suggest fixing this problem though? Isn't camping necessary for those who need to "recharge" or "catch their breath" before moving on?

Camping isn't the problem. Camping after a long hard day of fighting evil isn't bad. Camping after five minutes of fighting to maximize power since this particular dungeon or obstacle has no time pressure is the thing I don't care for. It's a style of play the game encourages and one I don't like. I acknowledge this as being purely aesthetic.

How to solve it?

The solution D&D 4e purportedly is taking is a shift in emphasis from "per day" abilities to "per encounter".

Another solution is always imposing a time pressure. This is "Midnight's" solution. You are rarely free of being hunted by the Shadow. You may be resting, but your enemy isn't.

In 3.5 you solve it by having a warlock instead of a wizard. Alas, there is no "useable at will" equivalent for the cleric (with its essential healing repetoire), so this is only a partial fix.

Gary

Mulsiphix
01-07-2008, 01:38 PM
gdmcbride are you saying that groups rest after each encounter so they have access to all of their spells? If that is the case I think that is crap. I think an adventure should have a constant pace with little time to rest. When played this way characters have to choose much more wisely what they will use and when. If your "fresh as a daisy" for each encounter I wouldn't imagine there is much strategy being used at all. No real feelings of "impending doom". That would blow.

InfoStorm
01-07-2008, 03:16 PM
Sounds like the new "Reserve Feats" will become the mainstay in 4.0 and spells just a backup. There is even a new healing reserve feat in Complete Champion that I see cleric having a really hard time NOT taking.

I don't think the translation for 3.5 to 4.0 will be too radical, if you've been following along with the books, but that still doesn't give me the ability to afford the books.

tesral
01-07-2008, 04:07 PM
What is this glaring problem you think resides in/with 3.5?

In D&D/AD&D/D&D period. It's called alignment. Something I did away with a decade plus ago. That is however a different threat.

tesral
01-07-2008, 04:11 PM
How would you suggest fixing this problem though? Isn't camping necessary for those who need to "recharge" or "catch their breath" before moving on?

I think he means a full stop several times a day. I don't allow spell casters to recharge in the middle of the day.

gdmcbride
01-07-2008, 04:52 PM
I think he means a full stop several times a day. I don't allow spell casters to recharge in the middle of the day.

I don't mean a full stop several times a day. I mean five minutes of intense action where parties spend spells and per/day spell effects like water. And then resting for the rest of the day to get back to 100% power.

If the tomb has been waiting there for a thousand years, so what if it takes you a month of attack, rest, attack again to fully raid it? And with that strategy you always have full spell selection.

D&D 3.x encourages this style of play. I don't like it. That's all I'm saying.

Gary

Mulsiphix
01-07-2008, 05:06 PM
Tesral what is wrong with alignment? It doesn't seem like the kind of thing a DM or players would get hung up on. Maybe the kind of thing that gets blurred as PC's move on but PC Drift is normal isn't it?

rabkala
01-07-2008, 05:12 PM
D&D has always encouraged that type of behavior in my experience. Every adventure can't be under time constraint or some arbitrary cause to force the players into action. They may not rest in the middle of the day, just teleport/get somewhere safe for the rest of the day to wait it out.

I like ideas like the Midnight setting, but even then players can rebel if pushed too hard.

RealmsDM
01-07-2008, 06:09 PM
ok, EVERY edition of the game had its over complicated rules- anyone remember the combat matrix from 1e?????

EVERY edition had its just plain weak rules- skills in 2e... bleh

I have no reason to believe that 4e won't have its fair share of complex rulesets & boring as s**t rulesets; and from what I've read so far, WotC is favoring the latter.

They're oversimplifing the game to draw in jaded, video game addicted kids who don't have time to READ A BOOK!

Mulsiphix
01-07-2008, 07:05 PM
They're oversimplifing the game to draw in jaded, video game addicted kids who don't have time to READ A BOOK!Well said. 4E seems like it is trying to attract video gamers. No only is this a direct change of their current demographic but video gamers in general aren't known for their patience. Those among them that read books on a regular basis are probably a very small fraction and by making these kinds of changes they are going to discourage a lot of their current user base from moving to 4E. Just doesn't make sense to me.

gdmcbride
01-07-2008, 08:52 PM
ok, EVERY edition of the game had its over complicated rules- anyone remember the combat matrix from 1e?????

EVERY edition had its just plain weak rules- skills in 2e... bleh

I have no reason to believe that 4e won't have its fair share of complex rulesets & boring as s**t rulesets; and from what I've read so far, WotC is favoring the latter.

They're oversimplifing the game to draw in jaded, video game addicted kids who don't have time to READ A BOOK!

Just because early editions had similar problems, doesn't make those problems virtues.

And yes, 4th edition will certainly have its own failings and problems. Perfection is not of this world. But maybe it will be better. We will see.

I also don't see simplification as a bad thing. Simplification could be taken too far, yes, but I for one would love to see a few of the needlessly complex subsystems (I mentioned conditions and AoAs above) pared down.

I want this, I play virtually no video games, I'm a thirty five year old happily married man with a kid of my own, and I have plenty of time to read many books.

Gary

tesral
01-07-2008, 09:03 PM
Tesral what is wrong with alignment? It doesn't seem like the kind of thing a DM or players would get hung up on. Maybe the kind of thing that gets blurred as PC's move on but PC Drift is normal isn't it?

Ask me in a new thread. It's a complex subject.

Mulsiphix
01-07-2008, 09:16 PM
Alright tell me about it in this thread (http://www.penandpapergames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3481). I'd love to hear why alignment is a bad thing. Find it almost hard to grasp myself.

tesral
01-07-2008, 10:14 PM
Answer posted.

RealmsDM
01-07-2008, 10:46 PM
Just because early editions had similar problems, doesn't make those problems virtues.

And yes, 4th edition will certainly have its own failings and problems. Perfection is not of this world. But maybe it will be better. We will see.

I also don't see simplification as a bad thing. Simplification could be taken too far, yes, but I for one would love to see a few of the needlessly complex subsystems (I mentioned conditions and AoAs above) pared down.

I want this, I play virtually no video games, I'm a thirty five year old happily married man with a kid of my own, and I have plenty of time to read many books.

Gary

Gary,

I hope you didn't take that as a attack aimed your way... that's not my style :cool:

I just have no faith in WotC of late. I feel like they're feeding us 100% grade A fertilizer when they explain the reason for a 4e system. I'm searching the web for redeeming points about 4e, but no luck yet. The tidbits of info out there just seem pretty weak to me.
Believe me, I'm all about speeding up play- I'm in the same wife/kid/age bracket as you; I know that finding the time to game is hard enough without wasting half of your afternoon trying to resolve a disarm attempt in a crowded tavern.
My main point is that WotC has shown us all smoke & mirrors thus far. Trying to hype up something no one really knows anything about (for the most part). We can all go back & forth with the yay vs. nay debate, but I guess the rulebooks will have to really wow some people, my self included, before I have more than a slight itch of curiosity for 4e.

gdmcbride
01-08-2008, 02:54 AM
RealmsDM,

I took no offense and I certainly didn't take anything you said personally.

If you are looking for a passionate defense of WOTC, honestly I'm not your man. WOTC has put out a lot of bad books recently. The Dungeon Survival Guide, the Grand History of the Realms (this would not be a bad book ... if it had a god damn INDEX!), Expedition to Undermountain, Expedition to the Demonweb Pits ... mediocrity after mediocrity. I remain no fan of the delve format. And now, the 4E preview books are upon us. Yay.

But 4th edition is their big project, the focus of years of design and playtesting. Maybe it will be better. Maybe not. I remain firmly in the wait and see camp. And arguments that 3.5 is somehow perfect (or nearly so) are laughable as you rightly point out. There is much I would like to see fixed.

In summary, all of this comes down to a very wordy, 'I remain undecided'.

"Patience patience said the man/
Patience patience I can't understand/
Patience like a man and a wife/
I got patience on my neck like a cold cold knife"
-- Violent Femmes

Gary

Bloodwyrm
01-08-2008, 12:23 PM
The more that I am hearing about 4E the more I'm seeing things I definitely like. I'm positive that now I'll be running, at the very minimum, a mix of 3.5/4E rules. If enough of the 4E changes are acceptable I'll probably just full out convert. My how information changes the impulsive lynch mob that is human reaction.


yeah i hear ya on that i may run a mix of rules in my upcoming campaign.

tesral
01-08-2008, 02:12 PM
I swore I would never again buy a new book from Lizards of the Coast if they left those damn lines behind the text in 3.5, they did, and I haven't. If I need a Lizards book I buy used.

No, with that low contrast choice they made it plain they don't care if me and my money stay or not. I even called with feedback and the nice woman I spoke with said the lines behind the text where the thing most people complained about. Yet Lizards did not listen to the customer base. Meh, my money isn't good enough for them.

4e be damned. It will sit on the shelf good, bad, or otherwise.

Farcaster
01-08-2008, 03:14 PM
the Grand History of the Realms (this would not be a bad book ... if it had a god damn INDEX!) 100% agreed on this one.


I swore I would never again buy a new book from Lizards of the Coast if they left those damn lines behind the text in 3.5, they did, and I haven't.
Lines behind the text? Are you talking about the soft brown wartermark lines? I've barely ever noticed them, and for me at least, they haven't been a distraction.

Mulsiphix
01-08-2008, 03:21 PM
I've got many 3.5 books and am not sure what you mean by lines behind the text either. Could you clarify? If it is the soft watermark lines Farcaster spoke of I find it hard to believe that of all the problems people complain about in 3.5 that these lines are the most common complaint :rolleyes:

tesral
01-08-2008, 05:09 PM
Well the two of you are not older gamers. You get to a point were high contrast is your friend. The "watermark lines" are a real problem for older gamers who don't have young sharp eyes.

Farcaster
01-08-2008, 05:34 PM
Hmm.. I have an astigmatism, so the next time I look at the books, I will take my glasses off and see if the watermarks are distracting at all at that point. My guess would be that the watermarks are really there to help prevent photocopying.

Mulsiphix
01-08-2008, 06:28 PM
I have to wear glasses whenever I read. I wouldn't have the ability to read the material without them. I think most people scan these days though. Photocopying probably isn't as popular these days.

ElrikDarkstorm
03-20-2008, 07:21 PM
I havent even made it toplaying the 3rd edition rules yet,i still play the 2nd edition and i thin that the 2nd rules were just fine to play with,i have no problem with them at all,maybe i am saying this because i have never played the new rules maybe they are better,there has to be something to them if everyone has switch over to them,,

cplmac
03-20-2008, 07:43 PM
I havent even made it toplaying the 3rd edition rules yet,i still play the 2nd edition and i thin that the 2nd rules were just fine to play with,i have no problem with them at all,maybe i am saying this because i have never played the new rules maybe they are better,there has to be something to them if everyone has switch over to them,,


Yes, total agreement. Check out a discussion I started about "Why do people not like the Thaco?" It did offer some interesting opinions.

Jonathan Kwiat
03-20-2008, 08:20 PM
Well.... I threw out all my cool D&D stuff when I had to move so I will definitely switch.

I haven't pre-ordered 4th edition yet because I think I just might want to entertain myself by finding a place to park and air-mattress with some soda, crackers, and fine cheeses in Manhattan and speak to fellow RPGers that I do not already know.

But heh, don't switch. I am glad you took the time and provoked a reaction.

tesral
03-21-2008, 09:38 AM
I have to wear glasses whenever I read. I wouldn't have the ability to read the material without them. I think most people scan these days though. Photocopying probably isn't as popular these days.

Exactly. I have a scanner on my desk with a one button PDF capacity. It's not even a high end scanner. I don't even need to run Acrobat. It would be easy to scan a book into PDF and put it on the web, regardless of the background.

So why is Lizards punishing the older gamer again?