Challenging Challenge Ratings...again

[WayneLigon]

It's only temporary, just a boom in sales due to clever marketing (deception, lying, sycophantic pandering of the masses, ect.), it won't last more than a couple years at most.

All sales go like this; it has nothing to do with 'lying'. Your lion's shares of the sales will come in the first few weeks and months as the majority switches to the new edition, then tapers off as the wait-and-see crowd buys theirs, then settles down to it's normal level of people having to replace books or new people entering the hobby.

'The masses' btw are the vast majority of your fellow gamers.

5-6 years is about right for most games other than D&D to do a new edition, so we'll probably see 5E or something like it in 5-6 years, yes. Probably closer to 7, though.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey there slacker. =^.^=

Hey dante dude!

It's only temporary, just a boom in sales due to clever marketing (deception, lying, sycophantic pandering of the masses, ect.), it won't last more than a couple years at most.

...and then what, people will return to 3.5!? m

This of course is purely opinion and speculation. All new things see a boom in the beginning. But with the value of the American dollar falling, jobs being in short supply, and a lot of gamers (and former employees) being disgruntled with WOTC, I can definitely envision 4.0 going under in about 5-6 years. WOTC has put more into advertising 4.0 and it will of course appeal to MMORPG addicts since it might as well be one.

Dante, 3/3.5 has been turning gamers away in droves for the past few years. Why do you think d20 lite systems (such as Castles & Crusades)have been doing so well.

It's just going to be the next Evercrack, not a pursuit of the intellectuals in our society (although a few misguided ones will pursue it...there are always a few).

Far too pretentious.

It's good that you're being a sport about it all, but I think a move to 4E would ultimately lead to a decline of older gamers purchasing anything from WOTC. Likely there will be a Cadre of older gamers that will get so fed up with it all that they will somehow get the rights to all true editions of Dungeons & Dragons (3.X and earlier) and reprint them for those who want them. This would probably be far more profitable in the long run.

I think you are living in a dream world.

I can already guess what your response will be since it seems you are trying to get WOTC to notice your work (a deal in the making there Krusty?).

Never even considered it. I work for Mongoose and I am happy with them.

It will just be more of you defending the wonders of 4.0, which I still fail to see since I'm a fan of detailed abilities, not overly simplified numerical crunch (which is all 4.0 really is).

I'll take simplified numerical crunch over complicated numerical crunch anyday.

What I think you fail to realize is that while 4.0 is easier and simpler, easier and simpler is also BORING. If I wanted easier and simpler...I wouldn't be playing tabletop RPG, I'd be playing MMORPG, which takes the guess work out of everything.

No. Easier and simpler mean more time playing the game and less time prepping the game.

Half the fun of 3.x is its EXTREMELY complex and customizable nature. It has rules and statistics for every imaginable scenario. It adds more FLAVOR to the campaign than 4.0's cardboard, half-measure rules and statistics.

What scenario can 3.5 handle that 4E cannot?

It would seem that the majority of new gamers are much lazier than the older generations of RPG'rs, having been pampered by MMORPG games they tend to use less of their brains and can't handle complex computations on the fly without using a calculator.

The point is complex computations are not FUN, they are WORK.

While this doesn't necessarily make them idiots, they certainly aren't the same pocket protector wearing, pencil using, dice grabbling, nacho eating, soda pilfering, supernerds that most older gamers are.

Younger generations are more prone to come from the mainstream of society than ever before. Neckbeards are becoming their own society as a result and are further removed from the very games they helped create.

Does anyone aspire to being a nerd really though?

Point in case being Gygax, who was not at all pleased with 4.0's existence.

He never even saw it you buffoon. He was displeased with 2nd and 3rd Edition.

Idiotic comment edited by Moderator Upper_Krust.

For your own good dante.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Okay last post for today (or else I'll be late)...off for a week and a half as of tomorrow - will catch up with everything then.

Hey Kerrick matey!

The point you're missing, UK, is not that Paizo is trying to make 3.75 better than 4E; they're trying to make it better than 3.5. They know they can't possibly compete with the juggernaut that is WotC, nor do they care to - they want to pick up all the people who are sticking with 3.5 and make a game that will be more appealing to them by fixing the flaws in the system. That being said, I tend to agree that I don't think you can maintain complete backwards compatibility by doing so - it'd be something along the lines of going from 1E to 2E, not 3E to 3.5.

I didn't miss the point of a 3.75. What I am saying, is that you cannot undo the numerous flaws of 3/3.5 without rewriting the rulebooks almost entirely which defeats the purpose of a 3.75. For instance how can they 'edit' existing Monster Manuals without a new Monster Manual - the simple fact is that they can't.

...and better than 3.5 is no longer good enough. They need to make it better than 4E thats the new benchmark as far as I can see, and theres no way they can do that and retain any links to 3.5.

Monte won't convert - he's got AE.

We'll see. Then again he's already made his millions he may not bother either way.

 

[dante58701]

Hey dante dude!

Hey there Krust

...and then what, people will return to 3.5!? m

Unlikely, more likely they would revert to an earlier edition of their own liking. If it so happens to be 3.0 or 3.5, more power to them.

Dante, 3/3.5 has been turning gamers away in droves for the past few years. Why do you think d20 lite systems (such as Castles & Crusades)have been doing so well.

Only because gamers have gotten lazier with the advent of MMORPG becoming so insanely popular. Face it, most people have been getting lazier. Even you are rather guilty of this. HOW LONG HAS IT TAKEN YOU TO FINISH THE TEXT? While I understand you have a life of your own and that this is probably just a hobby for you. You still need to pick up the slack a little. You procrastinate way too much. =^.^=

Far too pretentious.

Your welcome to that opinion, but like so many of your discussion statements, it remains opinion.

I think you are living in a dream world.

Also opinion, but I will concede it is something I hope for.

Never even considered it. I work for Mongoose and I am happy with them.

They're alright, they've come out with some interesting things. Urs being the best yet.

I'll take simplified numerical crunch over complicated numerical crunch anyday.

=^.^= Again with the obsession with oversimplification.

No. Easier and simpler mean more time playing the game and less time prepping the game.

Not if you possess the ability to do the computations without slowing gameplay. None of my games have ever suffered an annoying time lapse. Perhaps this has more to do with DM's and players being inexperienced.

What scenario can 3.5 handle that 4E cannot?

Oh, lots of things. Like figuring out if you can manufacture a microwave with multiple capabilities then cook the perfect burrito in it without blowing yourself up. Believe it or not, these little things come up. 4.0 is way too much about combat, combat, combat, combat, combat, combat, combat. Lame.

I like PCs and NPCs to be able to perform mundane tasks to get out of sticky ROLEPLAYING based situations. Rather than using some DM generated garbage that has no set DCs, ect.

The point is complex computations are not FUN, they are WORK.

Only for those who can't do them. A roleplaying game's idiosyncracities should not be taken from us just to cater to idiots.

Does anyone aspire to being a nerd really though?

Yes, those who value intellect over popularity.

He never even saw it you buffoon. He was displeased with 2nd and 3rd Edition.

Of course he was, 2nd Edition had made the game more combat oriented, instead of story oriented. The same with 3.X, or so the rumor goes. But we'll never really know the real reason because people stopped listening to him once TSR took over.

For your own good dante.

Yet again, opinion. =^.^=

 

[the Jester]

Wow. Just... wow.

It's just going to be the next Evercrack, not a pursuit of the intellectuals in our society (although a few misguided ones will pursue it...there are always a few).

Superior much?

Likely there will be a Cadre of older gamers that will get so fed up with it all that they will somehow get the rights to all true editions of Dungeons & Dragons (3.X and earlier) and reprint them for those who want them.

What I think you fail to realize is that while 4.0 is easier and simpler, easier and simpler is also BORING. If I wanted easier and simpler...I wouldn't be playing tabletop RPG, I'd be playing MMORPG, which takes the guess work out of everything.

"One true way of gaming" much?

It would seem that the majority of new gamers are much lazier than the older generations of RPG'rs, having been pampered by MMORPG games they tend to use less of their brains and can't handle complex computations on the fly without using a calculator.

Generalize much?

Jesus, dude, thanks for insulting me and thousands of other gamers with just about every word you posted.

For your information, I am a die-hard 4e convert, at least until it shows its warts. My gaming days go back to 1980; I'm old-skool and my credentials are solid. I'd rank myself as a "Tier 2" gamer- I'm not a Gary Gygax or Monte Cook, but other than luminaries like that, you're hard-pressed to find someone who has been playing dnd longer, more consistently and more enthusiastically.

So according to you, I guess I'm a "misguided intellectual?" You think the only reason Upper_Krust is pro-4e is because he's got some kind of hidden deal in the works?

You might want to stop and reexamine what you've posted. Isn't it just possible that, instead of your preferred gaming style being the One True Way (playing the True Editions), there might be different styles of gaming that are equally valid?

Isn't it possible that not everyone who likes what they see in 4e is trying to get a secret book deal, or can't add their con bonus to the roll of their HD every level?

Let me just suggest that it is possible.

Hopefully I haven't offended you back- I'm honestly trying to be nice here- but please, think about what you are posting. You come across as amazingly full of condescension in the post I quoted above.

 

[Pants]

Oh, lots of things. Like figuring out if you can manufacture a microwave with multiple capabilities then cook the perfect burrito in it without blowing yourself up. Believe it or not, these little things come up. 4.0 is way too much about combat, combat, combat, combat, combat, combat, combat. Lame.

I like PCs and NPCs to be able to perform mundane tasks to get out of sticky ROLEPLAYING based situations. Rather than using some DM generated garbage that has no set DCs, ect.

You've heard of skill challenges haven't you or are you too busy making pretentious and hasty generalizations that you haven't even read anything about 4e?

 

[Plane Sailing]

The only detritus is WOTC pseudoMMORPG. And that's putting is as politely as humanly possible considering the excessive amount of mindless suckage it represents to true D&Drs.

It has made a eunuch out of tabletop dungeoncrawling.

Fortunately some game designers aren't basking in the glory of the "evil stepmother" company and remaining with 3.x so that when WOTC pseudoMMORPG falls flat on it's face in record time and kills itself the way magic cards killed what was left of TSR, the rest of us will still have a game to play that's worth the money spent on it.

This also means that 3.x fans will at least get SOME of the 3.x we were initially promised.

This switch over is such a letdown for so many.

I can only hope that when WOTC bombs this one like they bombed the rest, that it drags WOTC under so badly that they have to sell it to someone who actually knows what the hell they're doing.

Dante, this thread doesn't exist for you to rant in.

Don't post in it again.

 

[Kerrick]

I didn't miss the point of a 3.75. What I am saying, is that you cannot undo the numerous flaws of 3/3.5 without rewriting the rulebooks almost entirely which defeats the purpose of a 3.75.

You could call it 3.75, or 4E, or 5E, but the simple fact is, it would be closer to 3.5 than WotC's 4E.

...and better than 3.5 is no longer good enough. They need to make it better than 4E thats the new benchmark as far as I can see, and theres no way they can do that and retain any links to 3.5.

Don't jump the gun here, UK - 4E isn't officially out yet, and it definitely hasn't seen widespread use. I'm not going to go so far as to say that it won't be as good as 3.5, because I'm not prescient. It certainly looks to be better in some aspects, but whether or not it's better in ALL aspects remains to be seen.

The fact of the matter is, you've got lots (thousands, easily) of gamers who play 3E/3.5 and have little to no interest in converting to 4E, either in the immediate future or ever. They like 3.5, which is why they're still playing it. Paizo has decided to tap into this market - they're revising the 3.5 ruleset to fix stuff, balance things out, and generally make it more playable (and you can't say it's not playable). Now, I'll reiterate my earlier point - they don't have to make it better than 4E, because the people they're marketing it to aren't interested in 4E. They're not trying to get 4E players to come back to 3.5. They're trying to get the 3.5 players to come to them.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Kerrick matey!

You could call it 3.75, or 4E, or 5E, but the simple fact is, it would be closer to 3.5 than WotC's 4E.

Well you could call it anything you want, but personally I don't see "being closer to 3.5" as a great selling point (for me at least).

Don't jump the gun here, UK - 4E isn't officially out yet, and it definitely hasn't seen widespread use. I'm not going to go so far as to say that it won't be as good as 3.5, because I'm not prescient. It certainly looks to be better in some aspects, but whether or not it's better in ALL aspects remains to be seen.

I'm a game designer by trade...for whatever appeal to authority thats worth.

When I look at 4E I can see where it improves immeasurably on 3/3.5E. So far it looks better in every way. The gameplay looks involving. The classes seem far better balanced. Monster/NPC design is simplicity itself. It all scales beautifully. The annoying clutter and sacred cows have been removed.

The fact of the matter is, you've got lots (thousands, easily) of gamers who play 3E/3.5 and have little to no interest in converting to 4E, either in the immediate future or ever. They like 3.5, which is why they're still playing it.

As opposed to the millions (sensibly in my opinion) converting to 4E.

Paizo has decided to tap into this market

Lets just state the obvious. The only reason Paizo are sticking with 3/3.5 is because the GSL prevents them selling 4E and 3E versions of the same product lines. They are one of the biggest 'players' and as such make lots of money from their 3/3.5 material. They simply don't want to have to give up that source of income/revenue yet because their material is still selling well. Same thing with Monte Cook.

- they're revising the 3.5 ruleset to fix stuff, balance things out, and generally make it more playable

Exactly what I did with the Immortals Handbook. I fixed stuff, balanced some stuff out and generally made it more playable. But you come to realise that you are only papering over cracks and that no matter what you do it won't be enough to turn it around.

Case in point. My revised classes on the website. Anyone playing immortal (Core 3/3.5) Fighters, Monks, Barbarians, Paladins, Rangers or Rogues is at a massive disadvantage to the spellcaster classes.

(and you can't say it's not playable).

There are degrees of playability though. You can say Rifts is also playable, but that doesn't make it a good system. 3.5 may be playable, but its simply not a good system.

Now, I'll reiterate my earlier point - they don't have to make it better than 4E, because the people they're marketing it to aren't interested in 4E. They're not trying to get 4E players to come back to 3.5. They're trying to get the 3.5 players to come to them.

In that I am sure they will succeed because 3.5 players will have basically no other option.

 

[Anabstercorian]

I've read 4e. I like the tactical game they've presented, though it looks to me that things will bog down badly at the high end due to the fact that hit points go up up up and damage only goes up.

There is no strategic game any more that I can perceive. With the removal of so much world-affecting power - no Wish's, no conjurations, no transmutations, gimped teleportations, minimized scrying - characters have little option other than to confront their opponents in tactical battles.

Hopefully later rituals will expand the potential of characters to interact with the world on a less square-and-stab basis, but I'm not optimistic. For this reason, 4e is failing to thrill me. It's very bland.

I do, however, admit that this paucity of flavor and strategic influence gives you, UK, a lot of room to re-introduce old capabilities in new, tactically managable forms.

---

I am somewhat amused at how incredibly right I was in my earlier guess about the split between tactical abilities (powers) and strategic abilities (rituals). I am dismayed at how utterly gimped those strategic abilities were.

---

I also urge you all to add Dante to your ignore lists. He's not worth the mental pain and suffering.