D&D 3E/3.5 A message to the 3.5ers

[WhatGravitas]

So, from all of us who are looking forward to 4e on some level, whether it's with mild enthusiasm or full-blown 4e sycophancy -- if you plan on sticking with 3.5 and have made that decision, please stop posting in the 4e forum.

While I criticise some 4E stuff, I'm generally optimistic. And therefore 3.5E grognardy and threadcrap is, for me, something between annoying and amusing. Depending on the direction, I either chuckle...

...or add people to my ignore list.

Cheers, LT.

 

[The Little Raven]

If they want to have any say in how the new edition appears, either in fluff or mechanics, now is the time for them to say it.

No. The books are less than 8 months away. The time has passed to make any impact beyond superficial things (like the name of Dragon's Tail Cut). They've had these changes in the works for years, and they aren't going to turn back at the 11th hour because some players are unhappy with the direction.

 

[Melan]

In which case the best course of action would be to close the entire subforum and wait patiently until GenCon 2008. Or whenever.

 

[Kunimatyu]

In which case the best course of action would be to close the entire subforum and wait patiently until GenCon 2008. Or whenever.

Nah, like Mourn said, cosmetic changes can still be affected. It's the basic structure of 4e that's set in stone.

 

[rounser]

They've had these changes in the works for years, and they aren't going to turn back at the 11th hour because some players are unhappy with the direction.

True, but when the change is as trivial as a find and replace, they have no such excuse to fall back on. It's just them ignoring their customers.

Why "dragons tail cut is a bad choice of name, thanks for pointing that out guys before we let it through" and not "warlord is a bad choice of name, thanks for pointing that out guys before we let it through"? I could give a care about the name of a feat, whereas this is a whole core class.

 

[The Little Raven]

True, but when the change is as trivial as a find and replace, they have no such excuse to fall back on. It's just them ignoring their customers.

Not really, since their customers don't agree. Some don't like the name, some do. If they haven't changed it, then it's probably likely they've gotten more positive than negative feedback, and therefore changing it would be ignoring the majority to cater to the vocal minority.

Why "dragons tail cut is a bad choice of name, thanks for pointing that out guys before we let it through" and not "warlord is a bad choice of name, thanks for pointing that out guys before we let it through"? I could give a care about the name of a feat, whereas this is a whole core class.

Because the response to Dragon's Tail Cut was pretty universal, while people are divided on warlord, and aside from marshal, noone has provided a satisfactory alternative.

 

[Connorsrpg]

Cheers to that! I am completely sick of the little snide and sarcastic comments. Even those with useful observations can't help themselves and add these following their valid point. Even when asked to not post some still do. DON'T!

I totally agree - stay out of the 4E forums!

 

[Melan]

I am always astounded when people on discussion forums complain about actual discussion taking place. Isn't that the whole point? :\

 

[rounser]

Because the response to Dragon's Tail Cut was pretty universal, while people are divided on warlord,

Lless than a 3rd of people want warlord, according to the big poll. Not even one in three, and that's before the poll was rigged in warlord's favour (anecdotally).

If we need universal rejection of something in order to get it changed, then we're sunk. Universal rejection of "dragons tail cut" is an aberration. Or it's a really bad name, I'm not sure which.

and aside from marshal, noone has provided a satisfactory alternative.

Warlord isn't "a satisfactory alternative" either, IMO, so I don't think that argument floats.

Marshal isn't either IMO - it is, as someone pointed out, a good name for a wild west class, but not D&D.

 

[Simia Saturnalia]

I am always astounded when people on discussion forums complain about actual discussion taking place. Isn't that the whole point? :\

Discussion is grand. I love discussion.

Repeating the same (often nonsensical) gripe in every thread =/= discussion.
Showing up in every thread to remind us about all the changes you personally hate =/= discussion.
Painting doom and gloom pronouncements about the game's playability based on a semi-throwaway line from a blog post taken in complete isolation from all other rules changes =/= discussion.
Proclaiming "It's not D&D" =/= discussion.

I mean, I hate Cyberpunk v3 with a passion. Barbiepunk can walk off a cliff and die alone in a landfill for all I'm concerned. It's an absolute mockery of the RPG that was my first real love in gaming. But you don't find me in Cyberpunk v3 forums yelling up one side and down the other that it's not Cyberpunk if it's not set in Night City, there's no Arasaka, and I can't go shopping for implants.