Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
I'm just not that "Psyched" about Next.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Desdichado" data-source="post: 6025630" data-attributes="member: 2205"><p>That's refreshingly honest and self-serving! And I don't mean that as an insult; merely that few people would claim to want D&D to be exactly what <em>they</em> want it to be just so they can be playing D&D and the game that they want to at the same time. I don't think that few people want that, just that few people are honest about wanting that.</p><p></p><p>Eh, anyway...</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I agree that that was an element of it, but I think you misrepresent how important that was to minimize the impact that changes to the game had on the market, and their rejection of 4e. In particular, changes to the implied setting (curiously, one of the few things about 4e that piqued my interest... until I realized that they were only half-heartedly making some nods in the directions I had already trod myself, and gone considerably further than WotC was doing. Not at all suggesting that they got the idea from me, of course.) I also think you are painting with <em>way</em> to broad a brush when you say that 4e is a restricted subset of late 3.5 rules. Certainly some of the rules themes that were going to make an appearance in 4e were foreshadowed with some late 3.5 rules, but 4e is a substantially different game that plays in substantially different ways from 3e. Many of those changes <em>are</em> innovative. And true, many of them actually made latent D&Disms that I personally (at least) didn't like even <em>more</em> prominent, but all that meant was that I personally was never more than mildly intellectual curious about 4e, rather than excited about it as a potential replacement for my already ongoing system of choice.</p><p></p><p>That is what 3.5 was in many ways. Although I'd argue it was moreso because of the OGL than because of the rules themselves; few of which were innovative to anyone who'd been paying attention to games <em>other</em> than D&D for the last 15 years or so (probably more, honestly) before it came out. Again; that was me; prior to the release of 3e, I was one of those latte set gamers who hung around on rpg.net and made disparaging and contemptuous remarks about D&D and the playstyle that it encouraged. 3e made me change my tune in many ways, although in many other ways, it only did so because it managed to be flexible enough to deliver a D&D that could be used for grognardy dungeoncrawls just as easily as for narrative focused intrigue or character dramas. The wild flexibility of the game drew me in, and with the release of other d20 games by WotC--Star Wars, Wheel of Time, d20 Modern, and then especially Call of Cthulhu, I decided that d20 was sufficiently robust and flexible that I could adapt it to pretty much any playstyle and any genre that I wished to play. Other than brief flings elsewhere, I still believe that--I really have little need of any other sytem anymore. And since I don't value system for its own sake, I see little reason to get excited about a new system that does the same thing as several other systems that I already own.</p><p></p><p>Which is why I just don't see the point of 5e, at least in terms of it being a product that <em>I</em> would want to buy. I hardly need <em>more</em> D&Ds when I have one that already does what I want, and when--frankly--I'm not really a fan of most of the D&Disms that have suffused so many versions of the game over the years. I really only value a D&D that is sufficiently flexible that I can use it to play something that little resembles that classic playstyle associated with D&D. And making D&D more closely resemble other games--many of which I already own as well--also does little for me personally. I guess, unlike you, I don't value the idea of playing D&D for its own sake. I value the idea of playing the game I like, and I don't particularly care what it calls itself.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Desdichado, post: 6025630, member: 2205"] That's refreshingly honest and self-serving! And I don't mean that as an insult; merely that few people would claim to want D&D to be exactly what [I]they[/I] want it to be just so they can be playing D&D and the game that they want to at the same time. I don't think that few people want that, just that few people are honest about wanting that. Eh, anyway... I agree that that was an element of it, but I think you misrepresent how important that was to minimize the impact that changes to the game had on the market, and their rejection of 4e. In particular, changes to the implied setting (curiously, one of the few things about 4e that piqued my interest... until I realized that they were only half-heartedly making some nods in the directions I had already trod myself, and gone considerably further than WotC was doing. Not at all suggesting that they got the idea from me, of course.) I also think you are painting with [I]way[/I] to broad a brush when you say that 4e is a restricted subset of late 3.5 rules. Certainly some of the rules themes that were going to make an appearance in 4e were foreshadowed with some late 3.5 rules, but 4e is a substantially different game that plays in substantially different ways from 3e. Many of those changes [I]are[/I] innovative. And true, many of them actually made latent D&Disms that I personally (at least) didn't like even [I]more[/I] prominent, but all that meant was that I personally was never more than mildly intellectual curious about 4e, rather than excited about it as a potential replacement for my already ongoing system of choice. That is what 3.5 was in many ways. Although I'd argue it was moreso because of the OGL than because of the rules themselves; few of which were innovative to anyone who'd been paying attention to games [I]other[/I] than D&D for the last 15 years or so (probably more, honestly) before it came out. Again; that was me; prior to the release of 3e, I was one of those latte set gamers who hung around on rpg.net and made disparaging and contemptuous remarks about D&D and the playstyle that it encouraged. 3e made me change my tune in many ways, although in many other ways, it only did so because it managed to be flexible enough to deliver a D&D that could be used for grognardy dungeoncrawls just as easily as for narrative focused intrigue or character dramas. The wild flexibility of the game drew me in, and with the release of other d20 games by WotC--Star Wars, Wheel of Time, d20 Modern, and then especially Call of Cthulhu, I decided that d20 was sufficiently robust and flexible that I could adapt it to pretty much any playstyle and any genre that I wished to play. Other than brief flings elsewhere, I still believe that--I really have little need of any other sytem anymore. And since I don't value system for its own sake, I see little reason to get excited about a new system that does the same thing as several other systems that I already own. Which is why I just don't see the point of 5e, at least in terms of it being a product that [I]I[/I] would want to buy. I hardly need [I]more[/I] D&Ds when I have one that already does what I want, and when--frankly--I'm not really a fan of most of the D&Disms that have suffused so many versions of the game over the years. I really only value a D&D that is sufficiently flexible that I can use it to play something that little resembles that classic playstyle associated with D&D. And making D&D more closely resemble other games--many of which I already own as well--also does little for me personally. I guess, unlike you, I don't value the idea of playing D&D for its own sake. I value the idea of playing the game I like, and I don't particularly care what it calls itself. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
I'm just not that "Psyched" about Next.
Top