Developer Talk = Gospel?

[jensun]

This whole e-stalking thing is annoying. Please stop following me around on messageboards and then posting the content here.

I wasnt aware that reading more than one messageboard constituted stalking.

You may want to obtain some perspective.

 

[jensun]

Li'l over-the-top for my tastes.

Heres a hint, you are no longer the only demongraphic which WotC are trying to cater to.

The new demographic includes a lot of people completely used to the idea of someone wearing some armour with a sword and shield getting right in the face of a raging God of Hellfire and kicking his ass.

 

[comrade raoul]

Look, the developers--those people who played RPGs 24-7--made 3e. And they left things in like gate. And Toughness. And 3.0 harm and haste. And the fighter. And the druid. And the cleric.

And you know what the 4e devs made? Skill challenges. And the warlock as striker (as another thread here proves is weak).

Forgive me for not trusting them implicitly.

I look at it a little like science. Rules for a game as complicated and ambitious as D&D can be very unpredictable, even in the face of a lot of playtesting. It's always tough to judge how balanced something will be in play, and it's especially tough if--as with the moves between editions--you're applying some fundamentally different principles about balance and analysis of play. Nobody's perfect, and there are some definite howlers in the 4e PH, but that doesn't mean the 4e devs aren't experts. Two steps forward, one step back and all that.

I can't resist the urge to chime in about all this magic stuff. Your preferences make sense: the different power curves for wizards and fighters do a lot to establish a way that magic can be special in a certain way, and how if you overcome the dangers of mastering it you can shake the world to its foundations. I miss a lot of the weirdness of earlier editions, too: there's a mystery and awe you get from the 1e holy avenger's circle of power than you don't get from the 4e equivalent's defense bonus. (But god, I'd rather be in a game with the 4e one!)

But, seriously, which is likely to be more fun for more people? Think of some friends you presumably have who, while geeky, aren't particularly attached to faithful representations of any particular fantasy narratives or mythologies or the history of D&D as such, and don't really have the time or the inclination to strategize a whole lot about the right builds or the intricacies of the rules, at least when they're not actually playing. Which edition would work better for them, do you think?

 

[Psychic Robot]

Heres a hint, you are no longer the only demongraphic which WotC are trying to cater to.

Here's a hint: you aren't the only demographic which WotC should be trying to cater to.

Funny how that goes both ways, isn't it?

But, seriously, which is likely to be more fun for more people? Think of some friends you presumably have who, while geeky, aren't particularly attached to faithful representations of any particular fantasy narratives or mythologies or the history of D&D as such, and don't really have the time or the inclination to strategize a whole lot about the right builds or the intricacies of the rules, at least when they're not actually playing. Which edition would work better for them, do you think?

I will grudgingly admit that you are probably correct in that 4e would be more fun for them. However, all of my friends who enjoy role-playing all enjoy the 3e rules as they are, complexities and all. The others would probably enjoy a tactical wargame; I don't know how they'd feel about a role-playing game. (And that's not to say that 4e is a wargame without role-playing.)

 

[AllisterH]

Heres a hint, you are no longer the only demongraphic which WotC are trying to cater to.

The new demographic includes a lot of people completely used to the idea of someone wearing some armour with a sword and shield getting right in the face of a raging God of Hellfire and kicking his ass.

Wait, you mean they're finally making the game where Conan can actually kick ass without scads of magic?

WAHOO!!!!

(personally, I always find this argument about the uber-wizard well weird given that Conan is such a big influence on D&D. Mages there suck royally)

 

[Branduil]

4e actually seems to be particularly amenable to worlds in the same vein as Hyboria.

 

[jensun]

Wait, you mean they're finally making the game where Conan can actually kick ass without scads of magic?

WAHOO!!!!

(personally, I always find this argument about the uber-wizard well weird given that Conan is such a big influence on D&D. Mages there suck royally)

Personally I always find it weird that if you look at any media outside of badly written D&D fiction you find whole hosts of non magician protagonists accomplishing all sorts of amazing feats.

The number of Wizardly type protagonists are relatively few and tend to wield magic which is one or more of: unreliable, dangerous, hazardous to your health, unpredicatable or down right hard to control or use.

The idea that magic should always trump non magic isnt supported by many of the defining influences of the game and is terribly dull in a game where everyone should have a chance to participate.

 

[Umbran]

People being rude.
People engaged in edition warfare.
People talking back to a moderator in thread.
This is why you can't have nice things.

Thread closed. Do not open another one on this topic.