D&D 5E cancelled 5e announcement at Gencon??? Anyone know anything about this?

[JamesonCourage]

It's not, IMO, poor behaviour. What you appear to be saying is that designers can only express positive feelings towards something, or they should not comment at all on it. That is, to me, asking the developers to act intellectually dishonest.

That isn't what I'm saying, though.

If the devs don't like something, I feel that they should be free to say it. To expect a dev to like every part of every past bit of D&D that has come out is quite unrealistic. There will be parts of prior editions that they like, there will be parts of prior editions that they dislike.

You're right, they won't like everything. Making any sort of pseudo-objective judgment call on what constitutes "fun" isn't something another gamer should be making, much less developers, much less developers out trying to promote something new.

I don't think that it is irrational to feel offended (my interpretation of what you and others feel, not trying to put words in your, or anyone's, mouth.) However, I am seeing people on both sides of the situation try to apply an objective decision (offended/not offended) to something that is clearly, to me, a very subjective situation.

I understand why people feel offended. I just don't think that is warranted.

*shrug*

I am not you, you are not me.

I agree that you don't need to feel offended. I also don't think it's right to blow off other people's opinions when they feel alienated by what the company did (not saying you're doing that, but others certainly are).

As always, though, play what you like

 

[mudbunny]

You're right, they won't like everything. Making any sort of pseudo-objective judgment call on what constitutes "fun" isn't something another gamer should be making, much less developers, much less developers out trying to promote something new.

But that's what developers do. Developers are hired by a company to make a good game. And for each developer, the good game that they are making should be based around a central idea (or set of ideas) of what is "fun".

As always, though, play what you like

*nods*

And always keep in mind that someone's enjoyment of something you dislike should in no way have an effect on your enjoyment of something you like.

 

[Then]

That fails to answer my question. You are also participating in the conversation. I just want to know what you meant by saying me of all people.

I am participating in this conversation because people were having doubts about the validity of Morrus' statement and were wondering about the reliability of the source. I seem to be the only person who was there that has seen fit to offer my own opinion and experience into the thread.

I thought we were suppose to be ignoring each others questions.

Oh you thought I meant this conversation here? No, I'm meaning the conversation at gencon. You know the one where 'you also heard the same thing from multiple sources' 'you were there talking to Morrus when the text came through' 'you personally know the source and wont reveal it'.
You know that conversation. It's strange because Morrus never mentions you anywhere. He never vouches your assertion of 'being there' even after posting in this thread multiple times.

It's just really weird. You say you had multiple sources tell you the very same thing, Morrus appears to have had multiple sources(we don't know he said both sources and source) doing the same. Morrus said he was never able to verify a bit of it.
It seems every other game company/freelancer/ex-employee/gamer/landlord out there seems to know way more about WotC's business then WotC does.

After all of this he still feels compelled to post the rumor?

Why?

What possible good would this do but start up yet another round of Edition Wars?

An unverified rumor that will do nothing but cause havok all over the web and all we get as a response is:
"I myself don't know what to make of it; as I tweeted, I was unable to verify it, and it kinda came out of the blue. I certainly trust the person who told me to not be a spreader of random gossip; however, I don't know whether that person's information is correct or not, or whether something got twisted somewhere along the way. It all seems very unlikely to me, but I figured I'd pass it along anyway.

 

[Lanefan]

As with every other change they made in 4E, they made it because they felt it was an area where there was room for improvement, and they genuinely felt the changes they were making were for the better.

The optimist in me would really like to agree with this, on an edition-level scale.

The cynic in me, however, says otherwise: the bottom line must be served and it thrives on change.

Lan-"two faces to face, no-one to blame"-efan

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Its been how many years now and people are still offended over this? This stuff was said back in 2007-2008 and people are still up in arms over minutae? I think that speaks louder than anything that was said by WotC in the lead up to 4E, and people still being upset in 2011 says more about them than it does about 4E's developers. You can put whatever face on it that you want(in this case making fun of crappy planes), but I think we can all see there are deeper issues.

 

[Lanefan]

It seems every other game company/freelancer/ex-employee/gamer/landlord out there seems to know way more about WotC's business then WotC does.

Not quite. They all simply know (or can easily guess) more about WotC's business than WotC is willing to confirm.

An unverified rumor that will do nothing but cause havok all over the web and all we get as a response is:
"I myself don't know what to make of it; as I tweeted, I was unable to verify it, and it kinda came out of the blue. I certainly trust the person who told me to not be a spreader of random gossip; however, I don't know whether that person's information is correct or not, or whether something got twisted somewhere along the way. It all seems very unlikely to me, but I figured I'd pass it along anyway.

We-ell, I was not present when Morrus received this information but I was at GenCon, and the rumour certainly fit in with the overall atmosphere of anticipatory silence on the announcement front from pretty much everyone (except Margaret Weis). I was fully expecting a 5e announcement at GenCon; I've been on record here with that forecast since last fall and have now been proven wrong, though perhaps I didn't miss by much.

Lan-"I am not the source"-efan

 

[Dire Bare]

Plane of VacuumTM - 'It Sucks!'

Plane of Dust - 'Look in the Plane of Vacuum'.

Negative Material PlaneTM - So, an electron walks into a bar, lookin' blue, and the bartender asks 'Why so negative?'

Sorry, I don't mind the Great Wheel cosmology, though a trifle Aristotlean for my tastes, but the puns were just sitting there....

The Auld Grump, Aristotle, Aristotle was a beggar for the bottle....

How DARE you Sir, mock what has come before! Roleplaying is serious business and should not be treated with anything resembling a sense of humor!

 

[Dire Bare]

I'm not sure I agree with this. Here's a simple rule for developers to follow:

"Don't try to be funny."

I'd wager the vast majority of bad developer gaffes would disappear.

Rather than folks avoiding the urge to try and be funny, I'd rather see segments of the fan community loosen up a bit, relax, and develop a sense of humor.

To be fair, "Don't try to be funny" when talking to fans is probably damn good advice.

Nah, despite all the noise online, I doubt a significant number of fans even noticed the "slights" perpetrated by WotC over the years, much less cared. I loved Planescape and the quirky, uniquely D&D cosmology it built upon, but when I read the offending quotes, I laughed. And I liked the Guardinals, and Bytopia! Still funny, and like most good humor, built upon truth.

Some folks get waaaay to serious about this fun & games stuff sometimes, IMO.

 

[catastrophic]

But, seriously, he made fun of the Plane of Vacuum and a creature.

But it's subjective! See, they should have been able to know what people would subjectivly be offended by!

So did you and Morrus plan this vast conspiracy before or after you crashed your ship in Roswell, New Mexico?

Where do you get off implying that the guy with the conspiracy theory problem is the one arguing against the idiotic cancelled-5e-annoucement-anonymouse-trustworthy-sources fiasco?

Minis combat is a central part of the game for some people, and it's an entirely forgettable add-on for others.

Likewise, the Plane of Vacuum was an important part of the game for some people, and entirely forgettable for others.

There is no real comparison here.

The designers should ideally in my view be supporting the way people do have fun, rather than making us all do what they think is fun.

Yes, but that statement could literally mean anything. Surely, if they try and support the way people do have fun, they are by definition 'making' people do what they think is fun? By supporting it in their products?

Or are we back to 'bad design/no design is somehow good design' again?

You're just drawing arbitary lines in the sand in order to rationalise the same old grudge.

I agree that you don't need to feel offended. I also don't think it's right to blow off other people's opinions when they feel alienated by what the company did (not saying you're doing that, but others certainly are).

I don't think it's right to pretend you're being reasonable when what you're doing is extremly unreasonable- perpetuating the myth that people have a valid reason to be angry to the point of being unable to describe the individuals using anything other than curse words about an overtly trivial jab at overtly trivial game elements in a case where it is overtly clear that no offence was intended.

There's nothing pleasant, polite, or reasonable about the mindset you're defending. In a mature, grown up society, we actually do have the right to draw the line, and decide when somebody is taking offence in an unreasonable way.

And three years after a random, arguably errant gag about some imaginye place-name, i'm going to go out on a limb and say yeah, we're not the ones being unreasonable here.

I was fully expecting a 5e announcement at GenCon; I've been on record here with that forecast since last fall and have now been proven wrong, though perhaps I didn't miss by much.

Nope; you were completly, utterly wrong.

 

[pemerton]

MrMyth, that was a very solid post.

I hate these statements, because they are so... backhandedly insulting.

<snip>

we get folks who say, "Yeah, I prefer the 3rd Edition cosmology, since the 4E one is devoid of intrigue and roleplaying and interaction and all about killing things. Oh, I'm not saying thats bad! Its cool if you like that, since you clearly don't play the game for the RP, and its good you have an edition that suits you!"

I want to add - it also seems to presuppose that combat is at odds with roleplaying, which (i) makes me wonder whether these people have come across games like The Burning Wheel and The Riddle of Steel, and (ii) makes me wonder what they're doing playing D&D rather than a game like HeroWars/Quest, or even something more out there like My Life With Master, which doesn't have heroic derring-do at the centre of its treatment of conflict resolution.

Your statements just... totally have no connection to what has actually been published for 4E.

<snip>

Which provide plenty of advice about the game, and none of it consists of "go kill evil things and don't bother with depth or world detail." Which provides an entire plane for interacting with the faerie folk.

<snip>

I just don't see it as possible that one can truly read the lore in the 4E planar books and articles - or even just the lore that crops up incidentaly in books like Primal Power, Divine Power, etc - and still insist that WotC feels "there's no need for boring depth and world detail".

I will go further than this. The 4e cosmology is superior to the traditional D&D cosmology for playing a game in which player convictions and thematic concerns are the main drivers, because it contains many elements which are heavily frontloaded with thematically rich conflict, and puts them on display for the players to choose from in building their PCs (via comments in the PHB, sidebars in the Power books, little bits and pieces in the powers' flavour texts, etc).

And The Plane Above even canvasses heroquesting (or as they call it, journeying into deep myth) for epic PCs - which is about as planes-at-the-centre-of-player-driven-thematic-conflict as it gets.