Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
4E is for casuals, D&D is d0med
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 4282391" data-attributes="member: 2067"><p>Well, 3e did have that whole "sliding scale" thing, in theory. It was as complex as you wanted it to be, because you could always simplify and abstract things out -- part of the idea was that it would be easier to simplify something complex than it would be to complexify something relatively simple (if you were looking for that complexity). Because Wizards, at the time, didn't want to tell you what kind of game to run, they would do all the "hard work" and leave you to make it easier if you wanted (which should be pretty easy!).</p><p></p><p>That was the promise. In practice, a combination of fans who were gaga over the complexity and a failure to deliver in all areas of that promise (like with accounting for treasure and in high-level play) meant that 3e ended up carrying the "complex" tag even slightly further than previous editions, probably, with its "place for everything and everything in its place" ideal.</p><p></p><p>3e wasn't trying to be the PS3 or even the Xbox 360. It was more like it was trying to be a home computer, like a Linux PC: something that worked well that you could tinker with endlessly. It was, at best, trying to be <em>quintessential</em> D&D. Take all the bits from the past, and reassemble it in a way that made it work like it was always kind of supposed to from the beginning.</p><p></p><p>In many respects, it succeeded wildly at that goal. Not that it didn't still have its problems, but its problems were things that D&D had ALWAYS struggled with (high level play, complexity, blah blah blah). These problems weren't un-solvable, and they didn't require all of 4e's fiery burnination to accomplish, but heck, if you need a new edition anyway, why not solve those problems with it. With the hammer of 4e, every problem looked like a nail, after all.</p><p></p><p>4e doesn't want to be quintessential D&D, at all. It doesn't want to be a ruleset that you take and play with as you like. Not even a little. It wants you to play, not tinker. In pursuit of that goal, it becomes not just simpler, but <em>simplistic</em>. The comparison to the Wii is apt, though we're still lacking the Development Kit for 4e. It's not a ruleset that lets you do what you want, its a ruleset that gives you what it thinks you want. And, given WotC's famous ability for market research, its probably right, more often than not.</p><p></p><p>3e wasn't the PS3, or the Xbox 360. 3e was a hacker's computer. 4e is kind of like the Wii, but the comparison looses some momentum in that the Wii isn't replacing anyone's computer, while 4e is replacing 3e (at least for WotC, if not for everyone). </p><p></p><p>To imagine the rage of the 3e fans, imagine if, for instance, you had to write your ENWorld post using the Wii's Internet channel and that little on-screen keyboard. If you had to buy a Dev Kit to program it. If, every time you wanted to IM a friend, you would need four sets of codes that could only be acquired offline to identify their machine, your machine, their IMing program, and yours. Imagine if you would have to buy one of Nintendo's $30 perhiphials shaped like a shopping cart to use Amazon.</p><p></p><p>This is part of the reason some of the 3e fans are ardently against 4e. It's not (just) that 4e isn't something their not interested in. Its that 4e means that something they ARE interested in is in danger of becoming so small, so niche, and so pigeonholed that, like most earlier editions, it becomes harder to actually get people to play it. And without a community, any table-top game is dead in the water.</p><p></p><p>Luckily, the excitement for Pathfinder means that, at least for another year or two, 3e can probably hold out, and can maybe even drift alongside 4e, informing it as it goes. It is, after all, the Open Source D&D. </p><p></p><p>I think my reaction to 4e is something akin to a hacker looking at an iPhone. It has some neat features I want, but it also locks me into some things I absolutely don't want (minis-heavy combat, weird PC/NPC/Monster interactions, bland repetitive abilities, etc) So I'll tinker with it, beat it around, void my warranty, and, in the end, do what I want with it. I think that WotC is infinitely smarter than Apple in that they basically encourage you do to that, even though the game doesn't really want you to do that.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 4282391, member: 2067"] Well, 3e did have that whole "sliding scale" thing, in theory. It was as complex as you wanted it to be, because you could always simplify and abstract things out -- part of the idea was that it would be easier to simplify something complex than it would be to complexify something relatively simple (if you were looking for that complexity). Because Wizards, at the time, didn't want to tell you what kind of game to run, they would do all the "hard work" and leave you to make it easier if you wanted (which should be pretty easy!). That was the promise. In practice, a combination of fans who were gaga over the complexity and a failure to deliver in all areas of that promise (like with accounting for treasure and in high-level play) meant that 3e ended up carrying the "complex" tag even slightly further than previous editions, probably, with its "place for everything and everything in its place" ideal. 3e wasn't trying to be the PS3 or even the Xbox 360. It was more like it was trying to be a home computer, like a Linux PC: something that worked well that you could tinker with endlessly. It was, at best, trying to be [I]quintessential[/I] D&D. Take all the bits from the past, and reassemble it in a way that made it work like it was always kind of supposed to from the beginning. In many respects, it succeeded wildly at that goal. Not that it didn't still have its problems, but its problems were things that D&D had ALWAYS struggled with (high level play, complexity, blah blah blah). These problems weren't un-solvable, and they didn't require all of 4e's fiery burnination to accomplish, but heck, if you need a new edition anyway, why not solve those problems with it. With the hammer of 4e, every problem looked like a nail, after all. 4e doesn't want to be quintessential D&D, at all. It doesn't want to be a ruleset that you take and play with as you like. Not even a little. It wants you to play, not tinker. In pursuit of that goal, it becomes not just simpler, but [I]simplistic[/I]. The comparison to the Wii is apt, though we're still lacking the Development Kit for 4e. It's not a ruleset that lets you do what you want, its a ruleset that gives you what it thinks you want. And, given WotC's famous ability for market research, its probably right, more often than not. 3e wasn't the PS3, or the Xbox 360. 3e was a hacker's computer. 4e is kind of like the Wii, but the comparison looses some momentum in that the Wii isn't replacing anyone's computer, while 4e is replacing 3e (at least for WotC, if not for everyone). To imagine the rage of the 3e fans, imagine if, for instance, you had to write your ENWorld post using the Wii's Internet channel and that little on-screen keyboard. If you had to buy a Dev Kit to program it. If, every time you wanted to IM a friend, you would need four sets of codes that could only be acquired offline to identify their machine, your machine, their IMing program, and yours. Imagine if you would have to buy one of Nintendo's $30 perhiphials shaped like a shopping cart to use Amazon. This is part of the reason some of the 3e fans are ardently against 4e. It's not (just) that 4e isn't something their not interested in. Its that 4e means that something they ARE interested in is in danger of becoming so small, so niche, and so pigeonholed that, like most earlier editions, it becomes harder to actually get people to play it. And without a community, any table-top game is dead in the water. Luckily, the excitement for Pathfinder means that, at least for another year or two, 3e can probably hold out, and can maybe even drift alongside 4e, informing it as it goes. It is, after all, the Open Source D&D. I think my reaction to 4e is something akin to a hacker looking at an iPhone. It has some neat features I want, but it also locks me into some things I absolutely don't want (minis-heavy combat, weird PC/NPC/Monster interactions, bland repetitive abilities, etc) So I'll tinker with it, beat it around, void my warranty, and, in the end, do what I want with it. I think that WotC is infinitely smarter than Apple in that they basically encourage you do to that, even though the game doesn't really want you to do that. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
4E is for casuals, D&D is d0med
Top