D&D 5E The Next Generation

[Fifth Element]

Again, i don't think you can attribute the dislike of 4e to "fear of the new". Lots of us like new things plenty. It is just we genuinely disliked 4e.

Okay, we're not really discussing dislike of 4E, either, since we're talking about 5E not 4E. But we are discussing a dislike of new "fads" in popular culture, things that D&D "should" reflect and things it shouldn't.

 

[pemerton]

Then you've got guys like ExploderWizard and the Jester, who are, I think, in their 40s, have a strong old school sensibility, run 4e, don't seem to like it and come on here to bitch about it. Why are they running 4e? I dunno. Maybe they find it easier to get players for the current edition.

I think Jester likes 4e. Or at least bits of it.

I assumed that EW runs AD&D or B/X, but maybe I'm wrong. He certainly complains a lot about 4e!

The main thing that strikes me, and sometimes irritiates me, is this apparent consensus on what D&D is, and how 4e departs from it, when some of us were trying to play D&D in the way we do now for years and years, and finally have a set of mechanics that works for us.

In mechanical terms, 3e/Pathfinder is the edition of D&D closest to late 70s/early 80s systems like RuneQuest, Hero, GURPS (and RoleMaster?) Logical, simulationist systems.

The reason why I would always run RM (or actually, these days, HARP) ahead of 3E is that 3E strikes me as an unstable and potentially incoherent mix, of gonzo core combat (ever-growing hp, AC, BAB, with mostly fortune-in-the-middle resolution) and gritty skills and combat manoeuvres (skill points, touch AC, simulationist resolution, etc).

It's a mix that does nothing for me, but obviously speaks to plenty of people!

 

[Crazy Jerome]

The main thing that strikes me, and sometimes irritiates me, is this apparent consensus on what D&D is, and how 4e departs from it, when some of us were trying to play D&D in the way we do now for years and years, and finally have a set of mechanics that works for us.

That consensus would not survive careful analysis were it spelled out in each case. It's more of an "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" than wider agreement, united more in disdain for 4E (or the a particular perception of 4E in some cases) than anything else.

Note that I'm in no way saying that the dislike for 4E is not real here! I'm sure that dislike would survive in most cases, where it spelled out. It's the "consensus" of what D&D is that is fragile. Nor is such a fragility limited to anti-4E folks, of course. If a consensus of the essential nature of D&D wasn't so fragile, WotC would have an easier job.

4E shares another dubious distinction with BECMI: Those are the only two editions where a segment of the hobby got to play their active version of "D&D" while simultaneously looking down their noses at another version. I'm sure it's a rare pleasure, after the years of getting snubbed by RQ elitists and the like.

 

[Ellington]

I do agree that D&D should try and appeal to the younger crowd, since they're the future of gaming and a big part of the market. I don't think it should be done by emulating whatever shows or media are popular with the young people today, though, since that pretty much always results in failure. Just try to win them over with the same magical wonder as D&D did with us when we first encountered it.

 

[avin]

(And one other point: why the Hell would you bring up Cowboy Bebop in a post about fantasy literature?)

I don't know, but Cowboy Bebop rocks.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

Meh, disagree.

Guess what? The fiction D&D is based on is till current and relevant. We just had a the LOTR moves and the Hobbit will be out soon. Roger Zelazny only passed away a few years ago and even teenagers are still reading his stuff. Andre Norton and Patricia Wrede, to name just a few, are still putting out great stuff in the classic style.

The good stuff never goes out of style. I was reading really good SF and fantasy from the 50s and 60s when I was a kid in the 70s. Current teenagers that I know are still reading the good stuff.

There's current fiction that's good too. Harry Potter was fun, and I enjoyed Twilight too (even though my brother called me 14 year old girl for liking it). You could could make RPGs compatible with the assumptions of these settings, but I don't think you could do it without jettisoning the gameplay of the previous editions. That doesn't make sense from a business point of view as you'd lose more current customers than you'd gain in new customers.

 

[Morrus]

I was hoping it wasn't the case, because it's not a constructive comment in any way.

A: "D&D should be directed at me."

B: "No, D&D should be directed at me."

That's not a conversation, and neither comment is realistic or reasonable.

Of course it's not constructive. It's a satirical repetition of the OP's request that I "go away" (his words). It was intended to illustrate the offensiveness of that demand, not reply to it.

As I said earlier: despite [MENTION=162]GnomeWorks[/MENTION] request, I will not go away.

 

[technoextreme]

Meh, disagree.

Guess what? The fiction D&D is based on is till current and relevant. We just had a the LOTR moves and the Hobbit will be out soon. Roger Zelazny only passed away a few years ago and even teenagers are still reading his stuff. Andre Norton and Patricia Wrede, to name just a few, are still putting out great stuff in the classic style.

The good stuff never goes out of style. I was reading really good SF and fantasy from the 50s and 60s when I was a kid in the 70s. Current teenagers that I know are still reading the good stuff.

There's current fiction that's good too. Harry Potter was fun, and I enjoyed Twilight too (even though my brother called me 14 year old girl for liking it). You could could make RPGs compatible with the assumptions of these settings, but I don't think you could do it without jettisoning the gameplay of the previous editions. That doesn't make sense from a business point of view as you'd lose more current customers than you'd gain in new customers.

I betcha more people know who Philippus Aureolus Theophrastus Bombastus von Hohenheim is than any Lord of the Rings character you can name is. Its also really bizarrely remarkable that D&D didn't actually latch onto him but it probably has to do that it actually entailed knowing about history and not actual popular culture.

If they want my money, they'll make a game I like. If they make a game full of oversized swords, WoW-style aggro, Psionic Dragon lizards from other worlds who've been genetically altered, tentacles, school girl ninjas, Sailor Moon, crochety detecives with .38s in Chicago or "wizards" who mainly run around holding their wands and getting into shenanigans with bad puns, I won't buy it.

Have you ever actually watched anime before?

 

[Elf Witch]

When I started playing, usually.

If we think of game systems as technology, we can adapt the following:

1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.

2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.

3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.

This is so much hogwash. I am 54. I fully embrace, cell phones, computers, IPADs, and a dozen other inventions. I was in my 40s when I happily switched to 3E.

My dad was born in 1918 he fully took to every new invention that came down the pike from microwaves to computers. He was still enjoying new technology when he passed away at age 86 in 2004.

His mother was born in 1886 she went from living in a home with no indoor plumbing or electricity and riding around in horse in buggy to modern homes and appliances, cars and eagerly watching a man land on the moon. She never thought anything new was against the natural order. This woman loved Elvis Presley, The Rolling Stones and the Beatles. More than anything else she loved flying.

 

[CleverNickName]

Just so you know, whenever people post line after line of stuff like this...

Hey, old people. And yes, I'm talking to you.
(snip)
So now I'm going to tell you that you need to go step back, and - in essence - go away.
(snip)
Your stories aren't relevant anymore.
(snip)
I've never read his works, and, honestly, I don't care to.
(snip)
It doesn't matter anymore.
(snip)
Etc., etc.

...some might get the idea that they are being unnecessarily hostile, and that they are attacking people personally. People do not usually respond well to such posts, if they read them at all. Perhaps your message would reach the minds and hearts of more people if it were more tactfully-worded.

Maybe this post is coming off as harsh, and I'm sorry for that. But...

Also, immediately following an apology with the word "but" tends to make the apology sound a little insincere. And by "a little insincere," I mean "completely insincere."

Admin here. Hey, [MENTION=162]GnomeWorks[/MENTION]. This bit right here? This is exactly why I had to just close this thread. Being deliberately provocative can make for interesting reading, but it seldom helps encourage discussion that doesn't involve many cranky people. Avoid this, please. -- Piratecat

-----

Anyway. Underneath all of the salt and gravel in your original post, you make an interesting point. Here is my response:

The game is Dungeons & Dragons. It is not, for example, "Harry Potter: The Roleplaying Game," or "Avatar: The Last RPG." Imagination and innovation are fine and good, but the title of the game alone carries with it a certain level of expectation. When someone says "hey, let's play Dungeons & Dragons," you do not expect to be part of a motorcycle-riding vampire gang, for example. But if someone were to say "hey, let's play The Lost Boys RPG," well...

Dungeons & Dragons is a great RPG. But it is not the ONLY one. More to the point, it must not attempt to be the only one. If 5E tries to be all games to all gamers, it will lose more than just the "old guard" of players...it will lose its own identity.

Wizards of the Coast does not want us "old people" to go anywhere. They need us, if for no other reason than to help them remember.