I shall begin by noting that I am a harsh critic of everything I encounter. I am what most people would call “grumpy.” So when I stand in defense of something it is only because it absolutely deserves it. That said, I shall delve…
In 1997 Wizards of the Coast bought D&D and began a three year long revision of the core rules. In 1999 Hasbro bought Wizards of the Coast and shortly thereafter in 2000 3e was published. There were many dissenters, but the fans largely loved the edition.
In 2003 3.5 was released and the fans were hesitant. The edition truly did need an overhaul, but this seemed like a money grab. Despite that, the result was a better game.
In 2008 4e was released and there was considerable contention. Three sets of core rules in eight years was not the ineffably cheap hobby many gamers came to love. And the gamers were right; primarily because they are the only consumers.
The foregoing is fact and is not contentious.
But when the gaming community now gathers upon message boards and decides to rank the quality of Wizards, they seem to neglect that their ranking is a direct refection on the game designers who crafted the current edition; game designers who are also a part of the community and read the words of those they strive to please. Ranking “Wizards” as a company is a direct reflection on the designers themselves, despite the fact that many of the flaws of the game are a result of the bureaucracy driving the company.
Now I am not going to stand in total defense of 4e. I think there are glaring errors that are honestly unacceptable in a professional product. There are confusions that Wizards should answer (stealth?) and errors that are glaring (skill challenge DCs?). But I’ve seen the designers post and they regularly are thoughtful and spell-checked. The errors are the result of a hurried product, not of careless designers.
And so I would argue that we, the community, have to understand that this is the D&D of today. It is a D&D that is capable of making profits, it is a D&D that, despite its failings, is extremely fun, and it is the best D&D that could possibly be crafted given the conditions. Regardless your qualms and regardless your reservations, this edition deserves your respect. The designers produced an amazing game that shines in spite of the demands placed upon them. It might not be your game, and to be honest it is not mine, but it is fun, it is better, and it is playable.
In sum I acknowledge that every argument made is justified. There are very valid qualms. But when we disparage “Wizards” the “suits” behind the errors of this edition are not attacked. It is the gamers who were loyal enough to the edition to make it their career who feel the brunt of our assault. They did, to understate the achievement, a great job. They deserve praise. Many give them that praise. But they deserve it from us all. And so while I am keenly aware that the core rulebooks I bought are, unlike every other edition of D&D, not sufficient to truly play the game, it was not “Wizards’ doing, but Hasbro. And Wizards, much less their employees, should not bear the burden of the wrongs they did not commit.
In 1997 Wizards of the Coast bought D&D and began a three year long revision of the core rules. In 1999 Hasbro bought Wizards of the Coast and shortly thereafter in 2000 3e was published. There were many dissenters, but the fans largely loved the edition.
In 2003 3.5 was released and the fans were hesitant. The edition truly did need an overhaul, but this seemed like a money grab. Despite that, the result was a better game.
In 2008 4e was released and there was considerable contention. Three sets of core rules in eight years was not the ineffably cheap hobby many gamers came to love. And the gamers were right; primarily because they are the only consumers.
The foregoing is fact and is not contentious.
But when the gaming community now gathers upon message boards and decides to rank the quality of Wizards, they seem to neglect that their ranking is a direct refection on the game designers who crafted the current edition; game designers who are also a part of the community and read the words of those they strive to please. Ranking “Wizards” as a company is a direct reflection on the designers themselves, despite the fact that many of the flaws of the game are a result of the bureaucracy driving the company.
Now I am not going to stand in total defense of 4e. I think there are glaring errors that are honestly unacceptable in a professional product. There are confusions that Wizards should answer (stealth?) and errors that are glaring (skill challenge DCs?). But I’ve seen the designers post and they regularly are thoughtful and spell-checked. The errors are the result of a hurried product, not of careless designers.
And so I would argue that we, the community, have to understand that this is the D&D of today. It is a D&D that is capable of making profits, it is a D&D that, despite its failings, is extremely fun, and it is the best D&D that could possibly be crafted given the conditions. Regardless your qualms and regardless your reservations, this edition deserves your respect. The designers produced an amazing game that shines in spite of the demands placed upon them. It might not be your game, and to be honest it is not mine, but it is fun, it is better, and it is playable.
In sum I acknowledge that every argument made is justified. There are very valid qualms. But when we disparage “Wizards” the “suits” behind the errors of this edition are not attacked. It is the gamers who were loyal enough to the edition to make it their career who feel the brunt of our assault. They did, to understate the achievement, a great job. They deserve praise. Many give them that praise. But they deserve it from us all. And so while I am keenly aware that the core rulebooks I bought are, unlike every other edition of D&D, not sufficient to truly play the game, it was not “Wizards’ doing, but Hasbro. And Wizards, much less their employees, should not bear the burden of the wrongs they did not commit.
