4E is for casuals, D&D is d0med
Brennin Magalus
First Post
hong said:
Hey, I know that guy. (From another venue.)
Anyway, I am disappointed we lost you to 4e. Maybe the rest of us can take up a collection to have you deprogrammed. (Try not to take notice of any unadorned white vans in your neighborhood.)
Brennin Magalus
First Post
I considered the possibility they mind-seeded you. I had not considered the possibility you mind-seeded them. I'll have to check their blogs for signs of prurience.
In any event, where am I supposed to find another statistician that plays D&D (and is not switching to 4e)? I guess I could ask Gani but he is so advanced in years that it really would be a 15 minute adventuring day with him.
In any event, where am I supposed to find another statistician that plays D&D (and is not switching to 4e)? I guess I could ask Gani but he is so advanced in years that it really would be a 15 minute adventuring day with him.
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree with the sentiments contained in the OP's link completely. 4E, IMHO, is a fantastic game. I commend WotC for what they've achieved.
My feelings on 3e VS.4e are thus; In 3e your imagination was limited only by the ruleset, in 4e the ruleset is limited only by your imagination. Just because something isn't printed in the one of the three core rulebooks dosen't mean it isn't possible. The ruleset is simple, yet comprehensive, enough to become intuitive. Which in turn opens the game up to limitless possibilities gameplay wise. Which I think is the true genious driving 4E D&D.
As a DM who more often than not ended up "winging" large portions of his campaigns, mostly because my players would often do things I could never have expected, I welcome 4E with open arms. For when that situation occurs now, I'll no longer have to stop the game and look for some obscure rule. I can simply keep the game going and in doing so keep myself and group entertained.
My feelings on 3e VS.4e are thus; In 3e your imagination was limited only by the ruleset, in 4e the ruleset is limited only by your imagination. Just because something isn't printed in the one of the three core rulebooks dosen't mean it isn't possible. The ruleset is simple, yet comprehensive, enough to become intuitive. Which in turn opens the game up to limitless possibilities gameplay wise. Which I think is the true genious driving 4E D&D.
As a DM who more often than not ended up "winging" large portions of his campaigns, mostly because my players would often do things I could never have expected, I welcome 4E with open arms. For when that situation occurs now, I'll no longer have to stop the game and look for some obscure rule. I can simply keep the game going and in doing so keep myself and group entertained.
WhatGravitas
Explorer
That is an interesting take on it and compares to well to the aims that 4E has: Bringing in more beginners, more fresh blood, and that is a good strategy, due to today's realities:
1) D&D, in any incarnation, cannot hold a candle to the White Wolf games if we get to immersive role-playing, these games often fit highly character-driven games better.
2) D&D is a pre-Forge game - love'em or hate'em, but Forge games have interesting concepts and hence also draw more specialised role-players to them.
3) A part of its niche, tactical group-gaming, is partially shared with traditional wargames and newer online games.
4) D&D is a brand and has high brand-loyalty and keeps gamers that way.
5) People have less and less time for casual activities nowadays, seriously.
So, by making the game more casual, D&D admits that it isn't one of the more specialised games - instead it utilizes the latter two aspect - keeping players via brand loyalty and making it more appealing to a casual role-playing crowd.
Because, at least I see it that way, D&D started out as very casual game - heck, it was basically Gygax and Arneson's pamphlet of modded wargaming rules!
By embracing it's casualness and cribbing intuitive concepts from other RPGs (a dash of narrative sprinkling), they made a very good entry-level game - and that's the point:
Not everybody wants to leave entry-level and entry stuff is also often associated with good memories - hence 4E could do for later editions what the original D&D sets (casual, fun games) did for modern editions: Nostalgia.
Sounds like a viable strategy and I suspect that similar considerations were behind it, considering that:
1) WotC tried to launch Gleemax.
2) WotC restructures MtG ight now.
Which both show that WotC tries to tap into that market of latent gamers that don't have the time for more invested gaming, hence also the layout of the 4E books: Non-textbook like, more like a "guide to gaming".
Cheers, LT.
1) D&D, in any incarnation, cannot hold a candle to the White Wolf games if we get to immersive role-playing, these games often fit highly character-driven games better.
2) D&D is a pre-Forge game - love'em or hate'em, but Forge games have interesting concepts and hence also draw more specialised role-players to them.
3) A part of its niche, tactical group-gaming, is partially shared with traditional wargames and newer online games.
4) D&D is a brand and has high brand-loyalty and keeps gamers that way.
5) People have less and less time for casual activities nowadays, seriously.
So, by making the game more casual, D&D admits that it isn't one of the more specialised games - instead it utilizes the latter two aspect - keeping players via brand loyalty and making it more appealing to a casual role-playing crowd.
Because, at least I see it that way, D&D started out as very casual game - heck, it was basically Gygax and Arneson's pamphlet of modded wargaming rules!
By embracing it's casualness and cribbing intuitive concepts from other RPGs (a dash of narrative sprinkling), they made a very good entry-level game - and that's the point:
Not everybody wants to leave entry-level and entry stuff is also often associated with good memories - hence 4E could do for later editions what the original D&D sets (casual, fun games) did for modern editions: Nostalgia.
Sounds like a viable strategy and I suspect that similar considerations were behind it, considering that:
1) WotC tried to launch Gleemax.
2) WotC restructures MtG ight now.
Which both show that WotC tries to tap into that market of latent gamers that don't have the time for more invested gaming, hence also the layout of the 4E books: Non-textbook like, more like a "guide to gaming".
Cheers, LT.
Majoru Oakheart
Adventurer
I think that there is a fairly large portion of D&D players who played the game to have fun with their friends killing monsters, taking their stuff, and saving the princess.
Simple, down to earth, beer and pretzel sort of affairs. They had some laughs while sitting in their basement. 3e brought a bunch of new players to the game, that's for sure. But, in the process(and over the years) it has alienated a lot of more casual players.
People who were very involved in the game(and I include myself in that list) were very well versed in the rules and the "secrets" contained therein. I was the first one to say: Your character is a 3 fighter/3 bard/2 cleric/3 rogue? Umm..you know that's a really bad character right?
I've seen people pick up the 3rd Ed rulebook and start reading only to become really intimidated at how complicated everything was.
4e seems to be an attempt to find a happy medium between 2e(full of holes in the rules and rather boring to run combats in but very easy to run and understand) and 3e(lots of interesting options, but there is a rule for EVERYTHING and you needed to know them all to be good at the game)
Simple, down to earth, beer and pretzel sort of affairs. They had some laughs while sitting in their basement. 3e brought a bunch of new players to the game, that's for sure. But, in the process(and over the years) it has alienated a lot of more casual players.
People who were very involved in the game(and I include myself in that list) were very well versed in the rules and the "secrets" contained therein. I was the first one to say: Your character is a 3 fighter/3 bard/2 cleric/3 rogue? Umm..you know that's a really bad character right?
I've seen people pick up the 3rd Ed rulebook and start reading only to become really intimidated at how complicated everything was.
4e seems to be an attempt to find a happy medium between 2e(full of holes in the rules and rather boring to run combats in but very easy to run and understand) and 3e(lots of interesting options, but there is a rule for EVERYTHING and you needed to know them all to be good at the game)
Nice Usenet post.
One thing though, rules complexity != campaign complexity, as demonstrated by the number of people who played deep, involved campaign using OD&D or beer-and-pretzels dungeon crawls under 3.5 can attest to. I'm sure my group wi have no trouble playing deep, involved, immersive campaigns --of we choose to-- using 4e.
Put another way, unlike the Wii, there really isn't a limit to how complex an app 4e can run.
One thing though, rules complexity != campaign complexity, as demonstrated by the number of people who played deep, involved campaign using OD&D or beer-and-pretzels dungeon crawls under 3.5 can attest to. I'm sure my group wi have no trouble playing deep, involved, immersive campaigns --of we choose to-- using 4e.
Put another way, unlike the Wii, there really isn't a limit to how complex an app 4e can run.
