When did I stop being WotC's target audience?

[The_Gneech]

Yeah, let's not get too hung up on the Model T thing. At no point did I say that OD&D was no good as a game -- for playing fighters, wizards, and clerics taking their 10' poles into dungeons it was the cat's meow in its day and while I haven't played it in years I imagine it's still fine for just that purpose.

But then there was Traveller. [1] And Call of Cthulhu. And Rolemaster and HERO. And Vampire. The meaning of "roleplaying" expanded with each one.

Some of this is what I was getting at by the definition of roleplaying.

Yes, I can come up with an interesting personality for my dwarf fighter, and that's roleplaying. I'm not arguing that point.

However, if I want to play a half-orc fighter/bard, and the rules pitch an error, that's bad for roleplaying, ain't it?

-The Gneech

[1] Let's also not get into whether D&D or Traveller was first, 'k? My guess is that for the average player, D&D led to Traveller, not the other way 'round.

 

[The Little Raven]

Not calling anyone a liar at all. I just thought it was humorous thing to post. Thanks for the shining armor routine though.

Ah, so it's funny to impugn someone's character for a chuckle.

Maybe I'm just too stodgy to agree.

 

[Fifth Element]

Until you lose your books. Sure, you can get replacement on eBay and the like; but that makes you a collector.

Buying the book to have it is collecting. Buying the book to use it to play the game is not.

 

[justanobody]

This, of course, being dependent upon the type of adventures and encounters the DM throws at the characters. For 2e and 3e, there have been discussions in products dealing with the running of single class campaigns. It just takes a little more effort and planning on the part of the DM.

The adventures would need to be the same for all attempts.

Take KotS. Not claiming it to be a perfect adventure, but run different party compositions through it and see what happens.

Have the following parties:

*Optimally mixed roles
*All wizards
*All clerics
*All fighters
*All rogues

Using the standard older classes to compare you can see that the parties will be able to compare to older editions balance without having to match up new classes to older ones.

Having to adjust for one specific class will only prove that the classes are not balanced if you cannot use the adventure for a single class group or a mixed class group.

The only thing you should have to adjust would be the tactics used for smarter opponents of the PCs to make use of the strengths and weaknesses of the classes.

If the survival rate of each of these parties throughout the campaign is not the same them you still have not achieved balance.

I rather doubt they're road-worthy. I'll rephrase.

No ones still uses a Model T for its intended purpose: transportation.

Still you are wrong. Also having the permanent license plate that doesn't require constant fees and such makes older model cars cheaper save for gas and repair costs. You are just making a snap judgement on what other people do or do not do and have no evidence of the matter, otherwise you would know your statements were false, and that people still do use Model-Ts as their primary form of transportation.

Oh my. I'm glad to see this thread is just as productive on page 9 as it was on page 1.

At least we are consistent.

 

[Fifth Element]

However, if I want to play a half-orc fighter/bard, and the rules pitch an error, that's bad for roleplaying, ain't it?

But where's the line? By that logic, any edition of D&D is bad for roleplaying because there will always be certain things (in terms of class combinations or what have you) that you can't play, per the rules as written.

 

[Fifth Element]

Still you are wrong. Also having the permanent license plate that doesn't require constant fees and such makes older model cars cheaper save for gas and repair costs. You are just making a snap judgement on what other people do or do not do and have no evidence of the matter, otherwise you would know your statements were false, and that people still do use Model-ts as their primary form of transportation.

Please. Back to the topic.

Suffice it to say I don't literally mean no one.

 

[The Little Raven]

If the survival rate of each of these parties throughout the campaign is not the same them you still have not achieved balance.

The system is balanced for diverse groups composed of multiple roles, which is the design intent. Shifting the goalpost away from the design intent, then declaring that balanced was not achieved according to your shifted goalpost is a completely dishonest assessment.

You are just making a snap judgement on what other people do or do not do and have no evidence of the matter, otherwise you would know your statements were false, and that people still do use Model-ts as their primary form of transportation.

Kinda like how you made a snap judgment about 4e never getting onto Wal-Mart shelves?

 

[Psion]

Personally, I couldn't understand the fascination with half-dragons etc, but there HAS to be SOMEONE buying all those products.

Hey, Allister, I know you are getting caught up in TLR's little crusade, but let me re-emphasize:

Not dismissing that such desire exists in some D&D fans as well.

 

[The_Gneech]

But where's the line? By that logic, any edition of D&D is bad for roleplaying because there will always be certain things (in terms of class combinations or what have you) that you can't play, per the rules as written.

It's not a line, it's a continuum. Certainly you run into the realm of diminishing returns somewhere -- there's no reason to put rules for playing a smurf in a Star Trek game, for example. But for a fantasy role-playing game that has had everything from gnome miners to aliens with lasers to mind-flayers sailing the stars, it certainly makes sense to go out of your way to be as inclusive as possible.

-The Gneech

 

[Fifth Element]

If the survival rate of each of these parties throughout the campaign is not the same them you still have not achieved balance.

No one is suggesting the balance is perfect. Just better.

I believe a party of 1st-level wizards could actually survive in 4E, for instance. Obviously different party makeups will have different strengths against different types of opponents, but that's always been true when discussing extreme parties (all wizards, e.g.).