Search results

The 5e team has said each class needs to clearly evoke the imagery of what that class has predominantly been throughout the lifetime of D&D. And while some may disagree, I just don't see how the "pick a cause, any cause" paladin championed by some is a necessary or desirable way to accomplish...

I again find myself agreeing with everything you're saying except for why this necessarily implies a LG alignment for the paladin. Clerics of deities antithetical to LG, like Lolth's, are required to adhere to an incredibly strict code or else be exterminated -- a far harsher penalty than...

I agree with virtually everything you said except for this snippet. Why would being closely tied to Good imply a Lawful Good alignment requirement?

I agree that paladins need to be the noble and chivalrous knights with whom we've become familiar in past editions, rather than a generic "pick a code and smite anybody who doesn't like it" class. However, I'm not convinced that imposing an alignment requirement is the right way to accomplish...

I think having an OGL is absolutely critical, but not for the reasons people most commonly give. When Ryan Dancey used to talk about the OGL for 3rd edition, he listed two primary benefits. One is that the OGL fosters the development of third-party content like adventures that drive sales of...

It's interesting how people seem to agree that alignment shouldn't be a straitjacket, except in situations where they think it should be. I think it's a mistake for alignment to have any mechanical impact whatsoever. Many DMs don't like to use alignment; definitions of the various alignments...

I both agree and disagree -- how's that for clarity? :) If Nintendo insiders akin to The Rouse were telling us that the proprietary sales information they've seen paint a dire picture for Wii sales, and if surveys posted on ENWorld and elsewhere said a competitor was overtaking the Wii using...

Some people think that if 4e isn't selling well then it must be a bad system. Too many others think that if 4e is a good system then it must be selling well. But I think the truth is exactly what Nemesis Destiny said -- the sales numbers for 4e, no matter what they are, don't tell us much...

My 4e group feels your pain, not wanting to remotely believe 4e could be a subpar marketplace performer unless someone can somehow sneak into WotC and give you the numbers only they have to prove it. All we can do is point you toward people like The Rouse who do know those numbers, surveys like...

I might actually agree with this. I take as given that the next edition must more closely resemble 3e/Pathfinder no matter how much we might wish it could be otherwise. As I've hopefully made clear, I say this not because I think 4e is "bad" and 3e "good," but simply because of the empirical...

I can't imagine it would be even remotely "safe" to go back to 1e/2e. WotC is talking a good game at the moment about an edition everyone can feel a part of, but the market realities underlying their actions stem from one specific edition -- 3e/Pathfinder -- being so much bigger than all other...

While I agree that no one should take any "victory laps" here, I do think it's important to understand why we find ourselves in this predicament. If the evidence we have from The Rouse, several sales reports posted on ENWorld, and WotC's own behavior are to be believed, 5e is coming years ahead...

Those who are trying to come up with timelines to "prove" WotC caused 4e's sales decline are missing the boat. WotC was proud of 4e, genuinely believed it would hold the vast bulk of the gaming community together, and planned to give 4e a standard 7-10 year run before introducing a new edition...

I'm not sure what you mean by "getting it." 5e is coming upon us several years ahead of schedule because 4e didn't sell well enough, losing market share to such a degree that D&D sales now appear to be trailing Pathfinder's by a significant margin. That's an almost unthinkable reversal spurred...

I don't believe so. That said, it's important to remember that there were internal disagreements within WotC as to whether 4e's main design changes were the right way to go, so it would be a mistake to assume that everyone with a 4e credit to their name necessarily agreed with its design...

Who says Monte isn't joining one of the existing fronts?

I'm surprised and more than a little disappointed by this turn of events. Monte played a key role uniting a fan base that had fractured in the latter days of 2e and I'd hoped he might be able to play a similar role today. As to why he left, I wouldn't be so quick to conclude that design issues...

This is where I disagree. Having a paladin that crusades against "people who aren't like me" dilutes the class beyond the point where it's useful, in my view at least. If there's a reason to have paladins in a 3e-style-multiclassing game at all, rather than simply having them be...

I'm always surprised by the number of people who argue alignment should have no mechanical consequences except when their favored trope from editions past was alignment-specific. My view is, it is perfectly OK to have the paladin crusade against evil without requiring him to be LG or indeed any...

Our gaming group split in two primarily over the issue of Vancian casting versus the 4e power system. Each side felt it fairly evaluated the pros and cons of the two systems, and I think for the most part they did. While some in the 4e group accuse the other of "grognard nostalgia" and really...