D&D General D&D 2024 does not deserve to succeed

If WoTC hurt its' business, the other publishers would stand to gain more from it. That's what happened between Paizo and WoTC back in the 4e era. Originally Paizo helped WoTC by publishing Dragon magazine and Dungeon magazine for them. Then when WoTC decided to come out with 4e and publish its' own magazines without any help, Paizo went out on its' own to create PF1. And for a time, Paizo did much better than WoTC. ;)

History could repeat itself here, if WoTC fails its' History check again. 😋

Considering how they've been expanding their support of 3PP in DDB and using the CC, I don't see much chance of that.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

What a productive weekend! I saw a bunch of you out there canvassing on social media. The movement to move away from D&D and not buy D&D 2024 is growing. Great job!


You're trying to argue that 6 attributes is the best way to design a game, without giving any reason - basically just to act like D&D does it best. If you follow your own logic, then D&D only having 6 is heavily flawed, and instead should have 20 different stats. Stamina, Concentration, Constitution are all different things. Agility, Dexterity, Speed are different. Upper Body and Lower Body Strength are different. Willpower, Beauty, Charisma are different. There are different types of Intellect and Wisdom. [[innappropriate content deleted - Morrus]] - some would say the most important stat of all.

What does "constitution" really, truly add to the game? How does it make sense that this attribute covers completely different things like poison resistance, ability to hold your breath, ability to survive without eating, and concentration? The answer is, unless you have a ton of attributes, they will very often not hold up to scrutiny. But a great game doesn't need to be so pedantic, and there are other ways to express character traits to begin with - such as giving characters more feats, which they can use to gain extra health or resists or concentration, thus expressing the "constitution" they want to have.



This is not accurate. Each caster has different mechanics, much more than what D&D provides.

And what imbalance? That statement is not the reality of how playtests have gone. You're also completely ignoring how there is more development to come, and this game actually cares deeply about both balance and flavor, and has the capability to constantly refine itself and directly include our feedback, unlike current D&D.



Yes, many games are. Down with D&D 5E!! Say NO to 2024! The dungeon is rancid and the dragon is plastic! Vote for REALNESS this year! Change starts here, make the world better for your children!
Seems pretty clear now that the whole thread is intended to troll us, and shame on me for responding. Well done, I guess?

I'm definitely putting an asterix next to any other posts that I see from, you, however:

*probably not to be taken seriously.
 
Last edited:

If WoTC hurt its' business, the other publishers would stand to gain more from it. That's what happened between Paizo and WoTC back in the 4e era.
Short term. Part of the existing market went to Paizo, but the total market size contracted.

Without the backing of a large corporation Paizo did not have the resources to grow the market, nor did they ha a product that was accessible enough to new players unfamiliar with rpgs.

There may be an alternative timeline in which Paizo were bought by Mattel and produced a simple accessible version of Pathfinder before WotC could get 5e out. In which case the cool kids would be hating Paizo/Mattel rather than WotC/Hasbro.
 
Last edited:

Of course then you've got the Warlock cutting themself for the same kind of bonuses trading 1hp for 1ap/1mp to give you an idea of just how valuable it 'Should' be...
so I cut myself 5 times or so and then spend 1 point to regain the HPs, cannot see any issue with that
 

Short term. Part of the existing market went to Paizo, but the total market size contracted.
correlation is not causation, WotC believed WoW caused the drop in players and started 4e to gain them back

Without the backing of a large corporation Paizo did not have the resources to grow the market, nor did they ha a product that was accessible enough to new players unfamiliar with rpgs.
they had essentially the same product WotC had used to rebuild D&D, not sure 4e was any more accessible, it certainly did not stem the tide

There may be an alternative timeline in which Paizo were bought by Mattel and produced a simple accessible version of Pathfinder before WotC could get 5e out. In which case the cool kids would be hating Paizo/Mattel rather than WotC/Hasbro.
or we finally would have broken the dominance of one game and they both would be much closer to each other in size
 

WotC believed WoW caused the drop in players and started 4e to gain them back
Was this around the time when Blizzard Entertainment came out with its' second edition pencil-and-paper World of Warcraft RPG? I remember when WoTC designed the 1st edition for WoW when 3.0/3.5 D&D was around. Then Blizzard created its' own version afterwards. I didn't know that WoTC created 4e because of WoW.

There are a couple homebrews for a 5e version of WoW on GM Binder at the moment.
 

correlation is not causation, WotC believed WoW caused the drop in players and started 4e to gain them back
And they were right. But they leaped in the wrong direction to get them back. It’s social interaction that D&D can do better than a computer, not combat mechanics, and that calls for an accessible, rules-lite system.
they had essentially the same product WotC had used to rebuild D&D, not sure 4e was any more accessible, it certainly did not stem the tide
They had the same product that WotC discarded as losing players to WoW.
or we finally would have broken the dominance of one game and they both would be much closer to each other in size
The hobby can’t support multiple similar sized products, that was amply demonstrated in the early 80s. WotC are struggling to turn a profit even with total market dominance. And even if it could, that would just leave two big toy companies making commerce-driven decisions for people to hate. Double the companies, double the hate.
 

Friends! Romans! Countrymen! Lend me your ears! No one has to play the new D&D, or the old D&D! If people want to, great! WotC has designed an incredibly effective interactive experience for you in D&D Beyond. The thing is remarkable (and their VTT looks amazeballz, too). If you like this whole experience, from the character sheets online to the paper books, go for it. Have a blast. As the kids say, love that for you.

If you don't want to support Hasboro/WotC, don't. It's that simple. Never been more options to play different games, different styles of games, different game systems, and in different ways. Discord. Roll20. Foundry. Face to face. Over the freaking phone you have in your pocket! Remarkable times. Play, brothers and sisters, and play with abandon!

Why argue about it? Do what you want to, how you want to, with whom you want to. All these negative vibes are harshing my Zen. I, too, feel conflicted by it all, and I ended up buying the online version of the new rules just because...it's Dungeons&Dragons! My first love. I may never play it, but I'm curious about it for sure.

As the old Zen story goes, who can say what is good and what is bad? Be kind to each other.
 


What does "constitution" really, truly add to the game?
Constitution can add a lot to the game actually. It clearly covers things that strength and dexterity do not. If I have to explain that to you, I have serious doubts about all of your arguments.
Yes, many games are. Down with D&D 5E!! Say NO to 2024! The dungeon is rancid and the dragon is plastic!
Why should I stop playing a game I enjoy? Can you clarify that for me?
Vote for REALNESS this year!
What does this even mean?
Change starts here, make the world better for your children!
I did, I taught them to play Dungeons and Dragons!
 

Remove ads

Top