Pulling the plug

BrockBallingdark · Jul 12, 2017

Honestly, I felt similiar but the D&D "mind set" was getting to me during Pathfinder. I left after 4th edition ruined our fun (not all gaming on the planet) but Pathfinder brought us back to D&D. The grind was too much and when 5th Ed came out, I jumped back to my old "girlfriend", happy to see her kinda thing.

I still think 5th edition is the best edition of D&D but it's internal mind set was still there even though alot of the outside framework was removed. I kept with 5e as my group of friends still love D&D but I've gotten into other systems that I prefer more than D20 D&D.

I'm not going to sell my 5e books as I really like them (though I got rid of all my 4e and Pathfinder books long ago) but I just rather play a different system. I've played D&D since 1st ed, though dabbled with the Advance Set a little as a kid.

There's nothing wrong with checking out other systems, the main thing is to have fun gaming.

Jhaelen · Jul 12, 2017

Tony Vargas said:
Really, almost any RPG other than D&D, you don't like it, nobody notices or cares, and you probably wouldn't think to point it out.

I'm not so sure about that. Edition wars are 'normal' for every RPG that undergoes significant changes from one edition to the next. E.g. there's been some pretty vicious exchanges over FFG's Warhammer or Star Wars RPG lines. Likewise OWoD vs. NWoD. Or Shadowrun, or 'The Dark Eye', or...

It's just that you don't see much of it if you don't visit the forums dedicated to these RPGs.

It's only RPGs that have changed little over the years that don't have it, e.g. 'Call of Cthulhu'.

Jacob Lewis · Jul 12, 2017

Tony Vargas said:
I'm curious, did you primarily play 5e or run it?
I find that it's much more engaging to run, personally, because it tickles my nostalgia for the long AD&D campaign I ran back in the day.

I am primarily a game master by choice, and have run games for every edition except this one. Not for a lack of trying, mind you. I bought Princes of the Apocalypse when it came out with the intention of running it for some family members and friends. I spent a few weeks reading over it, making preparations, taking notes, and all the other nonsense I usually put myself through when I get into that mode. But it didn't happen. I found the book was hard to follow, having to flip back and forth, and the prospect of running the game became undesirable to me. So that didn't work.

I played in a few games, both online and at physical tables. Played one session of AL ran by a good friend of mine, and a bunch of people who didn't bother naming their characters. I did not bother trying that again. I've watched every episode of Critical Role because I can do that while at work. I read the forums, look over the articles, and...

You know what? None of it really matters. I can suggest that I have given it a fair shake, tried something different hoping for a better experience, or never open a book and declare it to be utter garbage. Why should anyone care about how someone forms an opinion? The only thing you need to consider is the value you place on that person's opinion, and whether or not its going to affect you. (And I know that's not what you're asking me, Tony, but its late and it just came out as something that needed to be said for whoever else is still reading this. I need to go to bed.)

But for the record, I absolutely loved running 4th Edition. I adapted Red Hand of Doom from 3/3.5e and ran it online for a couple years. It was so well organized and flexible. The digital tools were invaluable. Everything I needed to run an encounter could be laid out in front of me, and I never needed to look up anything. That was my D&D. But unlike everyone else's edition, I did not get a friendly OGL for anyone to use after the rug was pulled from underneath. I don't have access to those invaluable tools to let me continue evolving it. And no one will likely be able to develop them on their own. I know I lack the skills. And if I did, there is no license that will allow me to do so easily.

Now I really need to sleep.

Tony Vargas · Jul 12, 2017

Jhaelen said:
I'm not so sure about that. Edition wars are 'normal' for every RPG that undergoes significant changes from one edition to the next. E.g. there's been some pretty vicious exchanges over FFG's Warhammer or Star Wars RPG lines. Likewise OWoD vs. NWoD.

I was really into Hero for a number of years. Hero vs GURPS could be pretty strident, and there were specific controversies over minutia like a limitation called Linked, but there weren't a lot of rev-roll crises, for a long time the game just got better, when it finally changed in a way I didn't like, I drifted away from the community. Same but more abrupt with oWoD, didn't take more than some reviews and a glance and I was gone.
I was away from the D&D community on UseNet, but the Role-not-Roll thing was huge on rec.games.frp.storyteller the one nonST game constantly targeted as the Rollplaying whipping boy was D&D.

It's just that you don't see much of it if you don't visit the forums dedicated to these RPGs.

And if the game has nothing left to offer you, you won't be there. Look at the 5e sub, there are those dissatisfied with it, but they do play and are looking for solutions, there are those who acknowledge issues going back and forth with apolglogists, but there's no one there I've noticed whose agenda is to destroy 5e, there's not the spite there was in the edition war.
I think that's the normal state of affairs, that the edition war was just extreme.

It's only RPGs that have changed little over the years that don't have it, e.g. 'Call of Cthulhu

hmmm until 3.0, D&D had changed little for 25years...

Nagol · Jul 12, 2017

Tony Vargas said:
I was really into Hero for a number of years. Hero vs GURPS could be pretty strident, and there were specific controversies over minutia like a limitation called Linked, but there weren't a lot of rev-roll crises, for a long time the game just got better, when it finally changed in a way I didn't like, I drifted away from the community. Same but more abrupt with oWoD, didn't take more than some reviews and a glance and I was gone.
I was away from the D&D community on UseNet, but the Role-not-Roll thing was huge on rec.games.frp.storyteller the one nonST game constantly targeted as the Rollplaying whipping boy was D&D.
And if the game has nothing left to offer you, you won't be there. Look at the 5e sub, there are those dissatisfied with it, but they do play and are looking for solutions, there are those who acknowledge issues going back and forth with apolglogists, but there's no one there I've noticed whose agenda is to destroy 5e, there's not the spite there was in the edition war.
I think that's the normal state of affairs, that the edition war was just extreme. hmmm until 3.0, D&D had changed little for 25years...

Hero had it with the Fuzion crossover (Champions, A New Millennium). People were very unhappy with the possibility of moving away from the Hero system to the Fuzion one.

JeffB · Jul 12, 2017

Tony Vargas said:
.. hmmm until 3.0, D&D had changed little for 25years...

As someone who started in the 1970s playing with the LBBs, I would completely disagree with this*. Play styles changed dramatically.Products changed dramatically. Aesthetic style of the game changed dramatically. In many case, rules changed dramatically from the original game (and variations) through Second Edition. The intention of what the rules are supposed to do, changed dramatically. How they were presented (player "vs." dm knowledge) changed dramatically.

Now if you mean: roll 3d6 for stats, AC goes low, To- hit tables, much common/shared terminology, etc. then yes not much changed.

* And I am not looking to edition war here. People like what they like, and that's cool.

Ovinomancer · Jul 12, 2017

Jacob Lewis said:
I am primarily a game master by choice, and have run games for every edition except this one. Not for a lack of trying, mind you. I bought Princes of the Apocalypse when it came out with the intention of running it for some family members and friends. I spent a few weeks reading over it, making preparations, taking notes, and all the other nonsense I usually put myself through when I get into that mode. But it didn't happen. I found the book was hard to follow, having to flip back and forth, and the prospect of running the game became undesirable to me. So that didn't work.

I played in a few games, both online and at physical tables. Played one session of AL ran by a good friend of mine, and a bunch of people who didn't bother naming their characters. I did not bother trying that again. I've watched every episode of Critical Role because I can do that while at work. I read the forums, look over the articles, and...

You know what? None of it really matters. I can suggest that I have given it a fair shake, tried something different hoping for a better experience, or never open a book and declare it to be utter garbage. Why should anyone care about how someone forms an opinion? The only thing you need to consider is the value you place on that person's opinion, and whether or not its going to affect you. (And I know that's not what you're asking me, Tony, but its late and it just came out as something that needed to be said for whoever else is still reading this. I need to go to bed.)

But for the record, I absolutely loved running 4th Edition. I adapted Red Hand of Doom from 3/3.5e and ran it online for a couple years. It was so well organized and flexible. The digital tools were invaluable. Everything I needed to run an encounter could be laid out in front of me, and I never needed to look up anything. That was my D&D. But unlike everyone else's edition, I did not get a friendly OGL for anyone to use after the rug was pulled from underneath. I don't have access to those invaluable tools to let me continue evolving it. And no one will likely be able to develop them on their own. I know I lack the skills. And if I did, there is no license that will allow me to do so easily.

Now I really need to sleep.

Firstly, I applaud your decision to do what was right for you.

Second, if you post your opinion on a discussion forum and invite discussion (you did start the thread), well, then, how you formed that opinion is pretty much fair game. Not that you're required to answer, because you owe no one anything but civility here, but you also shouldn't get defensive when people ask.

Tony Vargas · Jul 12, 2017

Jacob Lewis said:
I am primarily a game master by choice, and have run games for every edition except this one. Not for a lack of trying, mind you. I bought Princes of the Apocalypse when it came out with the intention of running it for some family members and friends. I spent a few weeks reading over it, making preparations, taking notes, and all the other nonsense I usually put myself through when I get into that mode. But it didn't happen. I found the book was hard to follow, having to flip back and forth, and the prospect of running the game became undesirable to me. So that didn't work.

I played in a few games, both online and at physical tables. Played one session of AL ran by a good friend of mine, and a bunch of people who didn't bother naming their characters. I did not bother trying that again. I've watched every episode of Critical Role because I can do that while at work. I read the forums, look over the articles, and...

Thanks, that's interesting. It was running 5e that sold me on it, not playing it. Though the first time, HotDQ, was pretty awful, I consider it my own fault for still being in 'playtest mode,' once my 20th-century DMing reflexes kicked back in it was pretty awesome.

So I was curious which side of the screen you'd formed your opinion from.

I've never been much for running published adventures, myself, and like going off on improvisational hijinks, and 5e seems well-suited for that. I can certainly understand being put off by one of the adventures, or by a 'meh' play experience or few. Not bothering to name a 1st level character is a notorious 'old-school' meme (not one I personally recall from back in the day), but I can see how that wouldn't make for an engaging run.

You know what? None of it really matters. I can suggest that I have given it a fair shake, tried something different hoping for a better experience, or never open a book and declare it to be utter garbage. Why should anyone care about how someone forms an opinion? The only thing you need to consider is the value you place on that person's opinion,

If I were still on the fence about 5e, hearing about other experiences of the former kind would mean a lot more to me than the latter would. Either would be more meaningful than a claim of the former, when undermined by details starkly at odds with the facts, which we got a lot of in the edition war.
Because, y'know, strangers on the internet, the only way I have to evaluate an opinion is how it's presented and what claims underlie it.

Of course, I'm not on the fence, so it was just curiosity, which you've satisfied without getting overly defensive or unduly attacking the game on your way out.

Thanks for the thread!

Tony Vargas · Jul 12, 2017

JeffB said:
As someone who started in the 1970s playing with the LBBs, I would completely disagree with this*. Play styles changed dramatically.Products changed dramatically. Aesthetic style of the game changed dramatically. In many case, rules changed dramatically from the original game (and variations) through Second Edition. The intention of what the rules are supposed to do, changed dramatically. How they were presented (player "vs." dm knowledge) changed dramatically.

I only came into it in 1980, but for a while, I was bumping into things from 0D&D & Basic while playing AD&D and hardly seeing the difference - there was more difference from one DM to another within one of the two 'prongs' or within an edition of AD&D than there was among all the TSR editions, IMHO.

But I was thinking of dramatic, technical changes. Like the handling of multi-class characters. MCing worked basically the same throughout the TSR years, though 2e loosened level limits to the point of meaninglessness, the mechanic was basically the same. 3.0 changed it dramatically.

But, maybe I should retrench and just say it changed little from the beginning of AD&D until the second half of 2e with S&P, C&T and the like?

Now if you mean: roll 3d6 for stats, AC goes low, To- hit tables, much common/shared terminology, etc. then yes not much changed.

Yep. And spellcasting being basically Vancian, and skills at best sketchy, and resolution systems varied rather than unified on the d20, etc...

Nagol said:
Hero had it with the Fuzion crossover (Champions, A New Millennium). People were very unhappy with the possibility of moving away from the Hero system to the Fuzion one.

Oh yeah! That didn't happen though, Hero stuck around. :shrug:

Fuzion was actually pretty innovative, it was open-source and had the switches-and-dials thing trying to be a 'toolbox' to build your own game...

...sound familiar?

...
Hey, could you imagine if Hero had crossed with d20 instead of Interlock? It'd actually have worked better in one minor way: d20 & 3d6 resolution methods are on the same 'scale,' (both average 10.5, for instance) the same magnitude of bonus works with either (though the bell curve makes a big difference in distribution. You could never hybridize something so class/list-based with something so point-buy/effects-based, but it's an amusing thought.

jasper · Jul 12, 2017

Tony Vargas said:
How do you 'force engagement?'
I decide I don't like a game anymore. I post.. "I'm not really so into this game anymore, bye..." and stop checking the forum where that game is discussed, since it's no longer of interest to me.
What do you do? Subpoena my IP to find out where I live?

Don Meepo, " fat tony."
Fat Tony, "yes Don Meepo?"
Don Meepo, " Thin Tony?"
"Yes Don Meepo?," replied Thin Tony.
Don Meepo, " There a Terrible Tony Vargus. Living in Edenvale San Jose Ca. He has decide not to be a member of the 5E family anymore. Please Gift him the sneakers of speed (a quickcrete product). And take him yachting in the bay."
Tonys, " it shall be done!"

Pulling the plug

BrockBallingdark

Explorer

Jhaelen

First Post

Jacob Lewis

Ye Olde GM

Tony Vargas

Legend

Nagol

Unimportant

JeffB

Legend

Ovinomancer

No flips for you!

Tony Vargas

Legend

Tony Vargas

Legend

jasper

Rotten DM

Similar Threads