D&D 5E cancelled 5e announcement at Gencon??? Anyone know anything about this?

[SkidAce]

There's only so many scenarios we can lay out for how utterly worthless a fighter is psat about level 6, before it becomes clear that 3.x isn't servicing some low-medieval 'simulationist' play-style- it's just broken.

Hmm, while I do not want to drag this into another Fighter/Wizard debate, the people who keep claiming this should realize that this problem did not occur for everybody.

It all depends on the campaign,adventure design, and group dynamic.

 

[Mournblade94]

There is nothing equivalent (at least that I recall) to the dwarves' captivity in the hands of the giants, the conflict between dragonborn and tieflings, the sundering of the elves between the Feywild and the world, the rise and fall of Nerath, etc. And the point of this stuff isn't that it's good literature - of course it's pretty trite as fiction. It's job isn't to be good fiction in itself - it's to seed conflict in game, in play. This is what 4e provides out of the box.

Corellon and Gruumsh as enemies is there, yes. This is perhaps the clearest example of what I'm talking about - if I choose to play an elf cleric then right away I'm thrusting myself into a situation where dramatic things can happen - all it takes is some orcs to appear on the horizon.

These conflicts were often established in individual campaign settings. I agree it was not established in the default rules, but the older editions tended to leave alot of fluff to campaign setting material.

But does a Planescape game test those beliefs? Does it challenge a paladin's conviction that Mount Celestia is at the heart of all that is worthy and good?

My impression is that it doesn't - that it begins with the thematic questions settled, rather than in play. Again, accounts of actual narrativist play in Planescape would be interesting here.

Probably adding to your point here, but I like the planes with absolutes. For me, MOUNT CELESTIA is the embodiment of good. Lower planes are the embodiment of EVIL. The story you describe would be a nice philosophical experiment in a novel, but I would not like that story to be my campaign.

Maybe you misunderstand what I mean by exploration. I'm not talking about exploration of the fictional world by the PCs - a fantasy story about imaginary Sir Francis Drakes and Captain Cooks. I'm talking about exploration of the fiction by the players as participants in the game. What the Forge calls "simulationism". One reason PoL doesn't support this sort of exploration-focused play is that the relevant fiction doesn't exist (unless the GM does a lot of work to flesh it out). It's a collection of hints about situations, ripe with conflict, that the players might engage via their PCs.

Because the sotry elements - the building blocks - are transparent, but where they lead to in play is not known until play occurs. This is the essence of narrativist play.

Can you expand upon this last bit please. It is interesting but I seem to have my idiot cap on. I am missing how the point of light in your example is not simulationism. Many THanks!

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Hmm, while I do not want to drag this into another Fighter/Wizard debate, the people who keep claiming this should realize that this problem did not occur for everybody.

It all depends on the campaign,adventure design, and group dynamic.

You know I played in games whee wizards only did direct damage and fighters totally out classes the Mage. However the fact that the DEFAULT way to play was out of Wack is what makes it come up...

We can not pretend that the style of plY was not casters rule.

 

[billd91]

But on this you are wrong.

3rd Edition D&D did start out with Greyhawk as its default campaign setting, to be sure. But over time, and increasingly so in 3.5, this was *stealth* changed to be no longer true and the "default" setting became a generic fantasy setting with a mismatch of Greyhawk "canon" and a bunch of new stuff that didn't "fit in" anywhere. New cities, gods, and events that are not remotely Greyhawkian at all. I remember being rather irritated about it all, in a very nerdy way.

No, I think he's mainly right. Greyhawk was still the default setting in 3.5. Greyhawk deities receive focus in Complete Divine and Complete Champion. Though I admit that I too had an impression of drift from canonical Greyhawk, and in more ways that just rejigging St. Cuthbert's alignment. I just can't quite put my finger on the source of it right now.

 

[technoextreme]

From what I have seen locally, I think that ICv2 is pretty accurate in this case. It may well be that there are more 4e players, but they are not buying as much, or are relying on the DDi.

Really? Outside of gaming stores I've had more success finding brand new 3.5E books than I have finding Pathfinder material. It was really kind of pathetic too because often what I would see is the entire collection of D&D material with a single Pathfinder book thrown in. The annoying part being that the single Pathfinder book wasn't even the core book.

 

[Imaro]

Really? Outside of gaming stores I've had more success finding brand new 3.5E books than I have finding Pathfinder material. It was really kind of pathetic too because often what I would see is the entire collection of D&D material with a single Pathfinder book thrown in. The annoying part being that the single Pathfinder book wasn't even the core book.

That's because the Pathfinder books were actually being bought by customers.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Hmm, while I do not want to drag this into another Fighter/Wizard debate, the people who keep claiming this should realize that this problem did not occur for everybody.

It all depends on the campaign,adventure design, and group dynamic.

In other words, it depends on the players and DM either being ignorant of the issue or deliberately stepping around it.

Avoiding the issue doesn't make the issue not exist. If I want to play a fantasy RPG as a Fighter and be awesome, 3E isn't my game.

 

[Imaro]

In other words, it depends on the players and DM either being ignorant of the issue or deliberately stepping around it.

Avoiding the issue doesn't make the issue not exist. If I want to play a fantasy RPG as a Fighter and be awesome, 3E isn't my game.

For your definition of Fighter and for your definition of awesome... I am certain that this is a true statement.

 

[Mournblade94]

That's because the Pathfinder books were actually being bought by customers.

NICE! XP no prize since I cant XP

 

[thecasualoblivion]

For your definition of Fighter and for your definition of awesome... I am certain that this is a true statement.

What goes beyond the truthiness of that statement was how epically 3E failed at delivering said Fighter.