D&D 4E 4E WotC way of saying your fired?

[delericho]

I think a good PR move for WOTC would be to get a working model of the game into the Paizo Designers' hands.

It would be, unless Paizo were then to suddenly go really quiet on the question on whether they'd be switching over or not.

 

[JoshuaFrost]

I was going to post and ask everyone to read the entire thread Erik's post was snipped from, but kenmarable has, basically, done it for me. Context is king.

Thanks, ken.

 

[hazel monday]

It would be, unless Paizo were then to suddenly go really quiet on the question on whether they'd be switching over or not.

That would be funny and scary at the same time.

 

[wingsandsword]

4E shows many good ideas and improvements. I rather hope that Paizo goes the "alternate player's handbook"-route, similar to IH, AE and similar books. Make a 4E sans "hyper" - something like "4E for D&Ders" - take the good stuff, and clean it up.

Now, that I like.

I've posted a lot of posts saying how I don't like what I'm hearing about 4e, but while I might not agree with all the mechanical changes, I could generally live with them.

4e might even be a mechanically fine and fun game, but what is bothering me so seriously about 4e is that they are changing the flavor and basic setting presumptions so much, to something much darker and grimmer ("points of light" pretty much is describing the Dark Ages, I'd rather my D&D be in the Renaissance), while making tieflings and warlocks common implies that fiends deal with mortals far more often than before (not to mention the new backstory of devils, Asmodeus being a god, ect), it seems that 4e is going to go for some demonic, grim flavor that might even be interesting as a D&D setting but not as the core (it's almost like using Ravenloft as the core setting for D&D).

3e seemed to go far out of it's way when it was being made to be about fulfilling and continuing with the traditions of D&D, while the rules might change the flavor has been relatively constant. Even 3e's "dungeonpunk" look and implied increase in the availability of magical gear was fairly mild compared to the scale of the flavor change implied between 3e and 4e.

 

[Erik Mona]

That's a long rant just to come to this conclusion. 3.5 support until Feburary 2009? Looks like I won't be buying any Paizo product anytime soon. I really think that Paizo is hurting themselves by doing this. Many on the Paizo forums seem to be leaning to the anti 4e side, Erik seems to be swayed by this crowd (just by going off this particular rant for what it's worth). I know it's important to listen to your fan base, however I would like to think Paizo is listening to D&D as a whole rather than a few Grognards on their forums.

As Ken and Josh have helpfully pointed out, it would have been very helpful if the OP in this thread had posted the CONTEXT of my message, which was that someone said they could not possibly imagine a scenario in which Paizo would stick with 3.5. Because it is my job to assume all possible scenarios, I laid out an unlikely series of events that would lead to 3.5 support of some kind after the release of the new rules.

As I said in my original "rant" and I have said several times since, the default assumption is that we will convert Pathfinder and all of our other OGL stuff to 4.0-compatible material as soon as we can, ideally around the launch of 4.0.

Wizards has been quite helpful about this, even if it is obviously (and rightly) not their top priority right now.

Again: I have every expectation that we will convert, and that the new game will allow us to do the things we want to do with our line (and probably lots of things we haven't even thought of yet).

In the 3.0 transition era, most of the publishers who were able to publish 3.0-compatible material and help to transition the audience had playtest copies of the rules early enough so that they understood the broad assumptions of the new game well enough to be able to put out product at the time of the transition.

The window of opportunity for that is starting to close for third-party publishers, and it's very frustrating. That said, I STILL expect that we'll be able to have 4.0 stuff out at the point of transition.

And that, as they say, is that.

--Erik

 

[The Little Raven]

And that, as they say, is that.

--Erik

I have one request.

Storm Wizard's HQ and wrestle control of Greyhawk from them.

 

[Shade]

I have one request.

Storm Wizard's HQ and wrestle control of Greyhawk from them.

Grab Planescape while you're at it, as well as the rights to all the old monsters in Dragon Magazine.

 

[Gundark]

edit: I don't know what I'm talking about

 

[SPECTRE666]

Hey, Erik I never meant to misquote you. Sorry if I did. With everything thats going on with the Realms, I can be alittle cranky. I just want to know what you meant by this.

Back at Wizards of the Coast in 1999 there was a lot of talk about "firing the existing audience" of D&D with the third edition launch. The logic went like this: "Even if we have to fire all of our existing customers, so long as we replace those old customers with more new ones, the result will have been worth it."

Because thats how I feel about the Forgotten Realms. I looks like nothing is going to happen to Eberron. I feel like I just got fired.

 

[MerricB]

TSR fired me from the Realms back in 2e.

Cheers!