Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pour" data-source="post: 5639665" data-attributes="member: 59411">Interesting thoughts, Bry, but do I really sound so elementary there at the end?I'm actually someone who is against focusing on lost markets beyond 4e rules conversions of past modules and prequels/sequels (if that's focus on the lost market at all, which, kind of off topic, I can't wait for the prequel to Temple of Elemental Evil). Focusing on the lost market won't help the game or its players in the slightest, especially if in doing so we move backwards into mechanical territory 4e already broke away from. The differences between the present and the past are too drastic, OSR and Pathfinder cater perfectly to previous editions (not to say I don't love their material, ala I'm totally picking up Petty Gods when it releases), and it makes the idea of some harmonic, universal system seem not only impossible, but repetitive, stagnant, which we're both against. That said, focusing on a lost market of gamers happy with their editions is not the same thing as focusing on a game past, present, and future D&D gamers can enjoy, and I think we both heartily advocate the latter, no matter what it looks like. If there is ever going to be any appeal for past markets, the way is  forward, in the evolution of the current game until it reaches a point  where lapsed players might again investigate it, when it ceases to be  the game they didn't like and has evolved into something else. I, as a  4e DM, want the same thing, the continued expansion, creation and  exploration of rules and settings.  When I can no longer happily share in that process, then I think I know I've found my edition of choice, and will use it to my heart's content, until which time I may jump back on the train.I never meant to exclude you, and neither did WotC. If you didn't like what was offered, that was your right, and you've put your money where your mind is and look at all the wonderful stuff that came from it. I don't see the problem in Pathfinders or... can I say it as a non-loaded term, grognards jumping ship. I know much is made of it, and I'm sure there are business ramifications from it, but if we're ever going to get to a new place, we need to cover new ground. Informed by the past, sure, but not beholden to it. I think I'm having trouble understanding, and this may be where I'm hand-waving, at what point you consider something a mistake, failure or wrong path when I'm claiming we shouldn't return to mechanical territory 4e broke away from. Are you talking about mechanics, that we should go back to defense saves and Vancian magic and monster/NPC blocks built more like PCs? Are you referring to actual IP/PR management? I feel I need a little more clarification there. I will say, though, that I got into D&D through video games. The majority won't, but I did, because of the exposure to the IP, and afterward exposure to two different editions, at which point I chose 4e. The game itself appealed to me, and the ideas of where it could go. I wouldn't call it a mistake to attribute some influence on the number of gamers related to what's out there at any given time, comics, games, animation, movies, etc. I also have to wonder at the gains from temporary players with public play programs, fortune cards, lower price-point Essentials material, and so on. Bry, I like you, I respect you, but the end of that post is a little harsh. 4e is not boldness buried under blindness (love the alliteration there, though) and not everything bold is good (the Blitzkrieg for instance). True, WotC took a step, and we're now seeing all editions take their continued, divergent evolutionary steps, which is exciting beyond belief, but 90% dead-end mutation and 10% new species is exactly the kind of failure and learning we need for progress. Would you be willing to say that 4e is a necessary and continued process on the road to new iterations of D&D, which may or may not appeal to any and all lapsed, current and future players through virtue of its mechanical differences from the past and reverence to the IP, and that we may differ where designers should start when trying again, it's ultimately agree it's for the better?And I was born in the 80's, old man! (just kidding)</blockquote>

Verification