The Great D&D Schism: The End of an age and the scattering of gamers

Desdichado · Feb 6, 2014

dmgorgon said:
You might think that D&D isn't a religion, but to a large extent the community is starting to behave like it is. Perhaps it's only natural because the community is ageing, but in IMO WotC is to blame for all of it.

I think that's a conclusion that can only be reached if one assumes that D&D is the entirety of the hobby (yes, I know, someone will trot out a second-hand interpretation fo something Ryan Dancey once said about the numbers of D&D vs. other games.) But the schism between Pathfinder and 4e was effectively and remarkably previewed by the success of White Wolf in the 90s and the minor diaspora of D&D players prior to the introduction of 3e.

And even prior to the announcement and previews of 4e, 3e was starting to show signs of an impending further diaspora of its own.

Herschel · Feb 6, 2014

Ahnehnois said:
Not really.

That you feel this way its telling, but then you also implied you not being around in the 80s meant that it wasn't the Golden Age.

Some people, like Monte Cook even, felt the imbalances were a feature. Many others felt it was a bug. The latter group was extremely large, even if they liked the rest of the system and had to ban numerous things at their tables.

Herschel · Feb 6, 2014

Hobo said:
I think that's a conclusion that can only be reached if one assumes that D&D is the entirety of the hobby (yes, I know, someone will trot out a second-hand interpretation fo something Ryan Dancey once said about the numbers of D&D vs. other games.) But the schism between Pathfinder and 4e was effectively and remarkably previewed by the success of White Wolf in the 90s and the minor diaspora of D&D players prior to the introduction of 3e.

And even prior to the announcement and previews of 4e, 3e was starting to show signs of an impending further diaspora of its own.

Must spread XP, but very much this.

Herschel · Feb 6, 2014

dmgorgon said:
IMO, 5e must happen regardless of it's success or failure. Even if it fails it's a step in the right direction. If it costs an edition to steer the game back on course then I support it.

The game was moving in the right direction and is now taking a step backwards and in a wrong direction. This is why I can't support it.

Isn't this fun?

dmgorgon · Feb 6, 2014

Hobo said:
I think that's a conclusion that can only be reached if one assumes that D&D is the entirety of the hobby (yes, I know, someone will trot out a second-hand interpretation fo something Ryan Dancey once said about the numbers of D&D vs. other games.) But the schism between Pathfinder and 4e was effectively and remarkably previewed by the success of White Wolf in the 90s and the minor diaspora of D&D players prior to the introduction of 3e.

And even prior to the announcement and previews of 4e, 3e was starting to show signs of an impending further diaspora of its own.

A schism within a particular religion (D&D) is not the entirety of Religion (all rpgs), so I think it's still a valid conclusion.

billd91 · Feb 6, 2014

Hobo said:
Yeah, some context helps here. The OGL would probably never have flown in the Hasbro days, but keep in mind that the priorities of WotC when it was owned by Atkinson and others prior to the sale of Hasbro were totally different. I expect that from their perspective even today, the OGL served its purpose remarkably well. And if they don't really like 4e, their decision can be seen as almost eerily prescient.

The OGL (2000) was established after Hasbro's acquisition of WotC (1999). It might well be that WotC was still behaving like an independent when they released D&D under the OGL and that Hasbro's management culture hadn't been imposed, but it's not like the OGL was in effect prior to Hasbro.

dmgorgon · Feb 6, 2014

Herschel said:
The game was moving in the right direction and is now taking a step backwards and in a wrong direction. This is why I can't support it.

Isn't this fun?

Yes, that's your opinion.

Desdichado · Feb 6, 2014

billd91 said:
The OGL (2000) was established after Hasbro's acquisition of WotC (1999). It might well be that WotC was still behaving like an independent when they released D&D under the OGL and that Hasbro's management culture hadn't been imposed, but it's not like the OGL was in effect prior to Hasbro.

They were. The OGL strategy predates the Hasbro acquisition, and it certainly predates the Hasbro interference in existing WotC strategy and business practice.

Derren · Feb 6, 2014

Herschel said:
Creature stats are based on the creature type

Creature stats are based mostly on level, especially the NADs which are targeted by Grab. And thats the reason why in 4E a small Spriggan is as hard to grapple than the much larger and stronger Troll, even when you only consider forcefully moving them when you already established a grab and why you have much better chances to grapple most Giants than a Greater (still small) Flameskull.

Herschel · Feb 6, 2014

You mean like 3E's CR/level, 1E/2E's HD, etc.? You know, the things built in to help you decide an appropriate challenge for characters?

The Great D&D Schism: The End of an age and the scattering of gamers

Desdichado

Hero

Herschel

Adventurer

Herschel

Adventurer

Herschel

Adventurer

dmgorgon

Explorer

billd91

Not your screen monkey (he/him)

dmgorgon

Explorer

Desdichado

Hero

Derren

Hero

Herschel

Adventurer

Similar Threads