Being threatened by products you aren't interested in

[Mercule]

I can be pretty harsh on things, at times. That's not necessarily because I feel threatened by things I don't like.

Disposable cap-systems, like MoI or ToB are no big deal. Ditto to source material books like "Lords of Madness" (I don't much care for aberrations). I may not much like the subject matter, but I don't actually expect every book put out by WotC to be tailored to me.

On the other hand, there is a limit to the amount of books I don't like before I decide that a company basically doesn't serve my needs. 2006 was a year like that, in some ways. Races of the Dragon left me perplexed, Dragon Magic left me perplexed, and MM4 left me perplexed, as well as bits and pieces of other books (e.g. Dragon Shaman in PHB2).

Tying into that are design elements that seem to be trends and that I really don't want to see canonized in the next edition -- due to self interest of having a game available that I don't have to mod the snot out of to enjoy.

An example is the dragon-blooded sorcerer stuff that was coming out a while back. It seemed like all sorts of PrCs, feats, etc. were assuming that sorcerers were all decended from dragons. I like that as a theory, and thought it was cool to throw in a few feats, etc. that gave life to the idea, but it got a bit much.

Right now, I'm concerned about skill tricks. I don't mind them as a one-off (though I'd never use them), but I hope no more see print because I don't want them included as a standard mechanic moving forward, especial if/when 4E shows.

 

[Psion]

Although I don't like to be so reactionary and often resent it when I hear such kneejerk reactions, but let me play devil's advocate for the moment:

In the days of 2e, there was a myriad of settings. Whether your tastes be FR, Greyhawk, Dark Sun, Spelljammer, Planescape, Al Qadim, etc., there was a wide variety of places to get your joy.

But if you listen to Ryan Dancey's Fear the Boot interview, you heard him reiterate how economically unfeasible this was. Thus Wizards, in 3e, went to supporting very few active product lines, to keep them viable.

But from a consumer perspective, I think this sucks. I feel like what they support is not sufficiently distinctive, and pine for the days of Dark Sun and Planescape.

So when it comes down to it, the fact of the matter is that whenever a product is made, they are per economic reality deciding not to print something else. Something that I would feel would be more interesting in the name of catering to a (IMO tepid) common denominator.

 

[Goblyn]

It's the Internet.

80% porn, 20% bitching.

This is at least as correct as everything else said here ... if not more.

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

What you say is true, but really, how valuable are those defunct settings when taken as a whole (actually, not as a whole since meta-settings like Spelljammer, Planescape, and Ravenloft would have to be revised so as not to infringe on each other, similar to what happened to Lord Soth's domain when WW licensed Ravenloft)? I doubt they would be very valuable, though bits and pieces could easily be very valuable when integrated into another product line (or the paperback book trade, or miniatures, etc., etc.).

That's kind of my point. The marginal value to WotC at this point may not be approaching zero, but it almost irrefutably has to be less than the value of another Eberron book or Complete X or whatever -- if it wasn't,they'd be using it. You have to trust that they're acting at least mostly rationally. If they thought there was any residual value, you'd think you'd at least see novels using that IP, since that stuff is largely contracted out and wouldn't be the drain on limited internal resources that a setting book would be.

But what's marginal to WotC could be huge to a smaller third-party publisher. And I think the continuity concerns would be pretty minimal at this point.

 

[Michael_R_Proteau]

Part of the bitternes may stem from the collector/completionist attitude many (not all) have in this hobby. There are many people who, when they invest themselves into a hobby or activity, have to have it all. If they invest in D&D, they want all the official D&D products, and when it is a product they don't like they either have to a) buy something they don't like, or B) not buy it and be unable to have the complete line of official D&D products. The find either option quite irritating leading to the bitterness. "Why do they have to publish something I don't like, don't they know how much I have invested in them over the years." It is , in some sense, a feeling of betrayal they are feeling by the company putting out something they don't like.

Such bitterness is rarely rational to the point of articulating lost opportunity cost or other logica explanation, it is more oftem more visceral, felt and acted upon by instinct. When called upon to explain the reaction, that's when the rationlizations start and things like oppotunity costs, and other facotrs are brought in to attempt to justify what they are feeling.

-M

 

[Shadowslayer]

I thinks its just because people are passionate about their hobbies. You say it only happens in RPGs but that's just dead wrong. Over the years, I've been involved at one time or another with the sport of paintball, and with slot-car racing.

Its all the same. When folks see something that might take their pastime in a whole other direction, they get antsy. Partly because they like the hobby the way it was once they got passionate about it...and don't want to have to change the way they think about it. They also don't want their stuff to become irrelevant.

Believe me, the guys who debate "dungeons are stupid" vs "dungeons are the main point of the game" could be the same guys I've seen debating pump gun vs semi auto, and the guys that argue that slot cars should be replicas of actual cars vs guys who feel that slot cars are nothing but an electronic gizmo that doesn't have to look like anything.

Hobbyists are largely the same, no matter what the hobby itself is.

 

[Pbartender]

Believe me, the guys who debate "dungeons are stupid" vs "dungeons are the main point of the game" could be the same guys I've seen debating pump gun vs semi auto, and the guys that argue that slot cars should be replicas of actual cars vs guys who feel that slot cars are nothing but an electronic gizmo that doesn't have to look like anything.

Good heavens... Think about sports fans and grass vs. artificial turf or domes vs. open air or even day games vs. night games.

 

[El Ravager]

Firedance definately is on to something, especially with the social aspect of getting a group of players.

For instance, I hate Warhammer Fantasy right now. It is not a new game or anything (well, a new edition just came out I guess), but it follows the example. When it gets right down to it, I have no problem with the game itself. It's probably a wonderful game. But I play Warhammer 40k and tuesday nights have been 40k night for years and years at the game store. Then somehow it switched to Warhammer Fantasy night instead. I have no interest or funds to start a new army, so I just don't play on Tuesdays (well I filled the void -- now I meet online to play with my Vanguard guild every Tuesday).

My 40k armies are collecting dust, and it makes me hate warhammer fantasy.

 

[Ulrick]

I just kind of take it all in as different strokes for different folks. I don't feel "threatened" because a company produces something that I don't want. I kinda wish Wizards would do more Greyhawk stuff but I doubt that'll happen (though I can't wait for Expedition to Castle Greyhawk). I just use my old Greyhawk stuff.

If I don't want something, I don't buy it.

 

[El Ravager]

Part of the bitternes may stem from the collector/completionist attitude many (not all) have in this hobby. There are many people who, when they invest themselves into a hobby or activity, have to have it all. If they invest in D&D, they want all the official D&D products, and when it is a product they don't like they either have to a) buy something they don't like, or B) not buy it and be unable to have the complete line of official D&D products. The find either option quite irritating leading to the bitterness. "Why do they have to publish something I don't like, don't they know how much I have invested in them over the years." It is , in some sense, a feeling of betrayal they are feeling by the company putting out something they don't like.

Such bitterness is rarely rational to the point of articulating lost opportunity cost or other logica explanation, it is more oftem more visceral, felt and acted upon by instinct. When called upon to explain the reaction, that's when the rationlizations start and things like oppotunity costs, and other facotrs are brought in to attempt to justify what they are feeling.

-M

Diaglo and his piles and piles of 'plasticrap' D&D minis?