Fortune Cards: and randomized collectible cards come to D&D

MrMyth · Aug 20, 2010

MrGrenadine said:
Which is why I for one will be hoping they tank. Hard.

For goodness sake, you want something random to happen in your game? Make it up!

Ok, let me quote my friend, upon rolling a natural 100 "DM's Choice" on any number of random item/effect tables:

"If I wanted to choose the result, I wouldn't have rolled on the damn table!"

Seriously, you are hoping they will tank because they present an option that other players want? Some people like Wands of Wonder. Some people like random item tables.

Others don't. WotC seems to be working hard to support both groups, with the new DM's kit including both the treasure parcel system and random item tables. Is it really worth complaining about someone else being provided an option that enhances their game? Especially in the form of an entirely independant product that you can completely ignore if desired??

MrMyth · Aug 20, 2010

ExploderWizard said:
It's this kind of thinking that makes Hasbro shareholders cry.

Roleplaying games are primarily driven by the imagination of the players. This cannot be sold so the D&D brand needs to move in a direction that does generate sales even if that means moving farther away from TTRPGs and closer to CCGs.

When the bottom line of a brand comes first, the substance and character of that brand come in a distant second.

Wait a second. You believe that RPGs are "primarily driven by the imagination of the players". That including something to generate random effects goes against the "substance and character of the brand", which is that you should just "Make it up!"

And, just to confirm, I assume this also applies to every random chart and table in, well, pretty much every edition of the game? You know, the ones for generating everything from items to towns to monster encounters to PC's height and weight?

All of that, clearly, not part of the substance of D&D. They clearly all work against the underlying principle of driving the game based on imagination alone.

Or were you perfectly ok with that, and only find this new way to generate random effects bad because WotC did it, and anything they do is clearly evil, missing the point of the game, and all about making money and turning the game into a CCG?

MrMyth · Aug 20, 2010

What I really find fantastic here is that the same people complaining that WotC providing mechanical ways to generate random effects means they are missing out on the point that the game is all about "imagination" are, I'm pretty sure, the same exact people who - when 4E cut back on craft skills and mechanical ways to represent background elements, in favor of representing those elements entirely through pure roleplaying - considered that an unforgiveable offense as well.

Vyvyan Basterd · Aug 20, 2010

Reynard said:
One thing that I am curious about is why the collectible card thing so soon after pulling back on the miniatures thing?

Because, like my wife's Partylite candle collection, you can only buy so many candles/minis before you have "enough" and the business model becomes unsustainable. Many candle consultants found this out the hard way. Not everyone feels like they got enough random minis, but enough apparently did for WotC to change the model.

Scribble · Aug 20, 2010

Reynard said:
One thing that I am curious about is why the collectible card thing so soon after pulling back on the miniatures thing? That would suggest that it wasn't the randomized, micro-transaction* aspect of the miniatures that was problematic (though maybe they weren't "micro" enough -- I know I would have spent a lot more minis if I could have dropped 2 or 3 bucks for a box with just a couple in it, but I'm weird like that). Obviously, WotC sees value in getting folks to buy the same stuff over and over again. So why the switch to cards?

Relatedly, will counters replace minis. The Monster box seems to suggest it will. I could easily see randomized monster token packs, too.

Again it's the how they're intended to be used by the purchaser aspect.

Randomized minis for the RPG was annoying because we need specific minis to match the scene we've built.

Notice the switch to tokens? They can actually give us non random tokens to represent the monsters without it being too costly.

Notice how the player power cards aren't random? Again having to buy random cards to represent non random elements of the game would be annoying at best.

These cards are designed to be random. The fact that they are random boosters is part of the very reason you're buying them. They're not designed to represent a non random element. You don't NEED specific cards to put them to use- You use whatever you get, the luck of the draw.

WoTC gets to feed off of those people who enjoy "randomness" and seeing what they get this time... While not screwing over those that just want to play the game by making the things that aren't random random.

Well played, in my opinion, if you can get past the fear.

Korgoth · Aug 20, 2010

ExploderWizard said:
It's this kind of thinking that makes Hasbro shareholders cry.

Roleplaying games are primarily driven by the imagination of the players. This cannot be sold so the D&D brand needs to move in a direction that does generate sales even if that means moving farther away from TTRPGs and closer to CCGs.

When the bottom line of a brand comes first, the substance and character of that brand come in a distant second.

Yeah, it's a fine line though. If it turns into Corporate: The Whoring, people might actually stop buying it. No brand is essentially evergreen. It is possible to kill the goose what lays golden eggs.

MrGrenadine · Aug 20, 2010

MrMyth said:
Seriously, you are hoping they will tank because they present an option that other players want?

Well, not exactly. I don't want them to fail because they present an option that other players want. That would be an odd position to have.

Honestly, I think that if people want to play a TTRPG with cards instead of dice, or both or whatever, then they should be able to do that. Hell, if someone want to create an RPG with a tennis mechanic, where you have to play a set to determine initiative, who am I to complain? But there are games out there that incorporate all sorts of things like cards, etc. that aren't D&D--why can't people just play those, instead of changing a game that doesn't include those things?

So, no, I don't want them to fail because people like them--I think people should have things that they like. And its not that I want collectible card games in general to be unsuccessful. I just want these particular cards to be unsuccessful in the hope that it would deter WotC from adding more and more fiddly collectible add-on features to D&D while they hold the reins.

BryonD · Aug 20, 2010

MrMyth said:
What I really find fantastic here is that the same people complaining that WotC providing mechanical ways to generate random effects means they are missing out on the point that the game is all about "imagination" are, I'm pretty sure, the same exact people who - when 4E cut back on craft skills and mechanical ways to represent background elements, in favor of representing those elements entirely through pure roleplaying - considered that an unforgiveable offense as well.

Personally, I don't have a problem with cards as a mechanism for randomness.

That said, I'm not sure I'd go for this particular version if it was for 3E.

But I really find the above quote typical of the failure to comprehend the differences in play style. Because it absolutely fails to comprehend the distinction between the "role play" side of things and the "game" side of things as seen by someone who gains enjoyment from the simulation perspective.

Stormtower · Aug 20, 2010

I really enjoy running 4E, after initially being only lukewarm to it (in '07 during the leadup to launch). After several years running it, I am a 4E CONvert (meaning I run 4E at conventions because I love D&D and want it to survive) and crowned my 4E experience by getting to run this year's D&D Championship -- Epic level 4E PCs versus Orcus -- at GenCon.

There is no whining in D&D (at least, that is MY houserule). So those who defend putting collectible cards in D&D, listen carefully to the lack of whine in my post.

Wizards of the Coast, know that I enjoy & support 4E. But know that you have now gone where I, as a consumer, will not follow. I'll still run 4E and take a long look at Essentials, as well as supporting the RPGA as a convention DM, but I'm not buying these randomized collectible cards. Don't care if players bring the cards to the table, I won't object to con players using them, etc... but I'm a completist usually (at least 1 of every mini since Harbinger, all 4E hardbacks, huge 3.5 & PFRPG collection) and there's no way I'm buying these, ever.

Love the game, hate the marketing strat.

Scribble · Aug 20, 2010

MrGrenadine said:
But there are games out there that incorporate all sorts of things like cards, etc. that aren't D&D--why can't people just play those, instead of changing a game that doesn't include those things?

Cuz they like D&D, and think it's fun- but also think it would be more fun if X feature was a part of it.

D&D has a long history of stuff that's cool being added to it because people liked D&D and also wanted more stuff to be a part of it.

I mean before 3e there were games that let you play a Dwarven Wizard, why couldn't people go and play those instead of giving Dwarves in D&D the ability to be a wizard?

Hey for that matter, why do we need to add these stupid plastic polyhedrons to the game... We already had Chits!

Fortune Cards: and randomized collectible cards come to D&D

MrMyth

First Post

MrMyth

First Post

MrMyth

First Post

Vyvyan Basterd

Adventurer

Scribble

First Post

Korgoth

First Post

MrGrenadine

Explorer

BryonD

Hero

Stormtower

First Post

Scribble

First Post

Similar Threads