Spelljammer Dark Sun confirmed? Or, the mysterious case of the dissappearing Spelljammer article...

[Synthil]

You mean the Weave? I'm playing D&D for eleven years now and didn't even know about this "Weave" until a few hours ago. So yes, absolutely.

 

[TwoSix]

I didn't say it was a goal. I said they don't care and have no respect for them or their experience. All they care about is what their new fans and those who already agree with them like. Since you think that's great and correct, I'm sure you're good with that.

You can respect people's preferences while simultaneously choosing not to cater to them.

You can continue to feel aggrieved in as public a manner as you choose, of course, but I see no compelling argument that WotC has any moral obligation to reference previous material in their new designs. The only reason they would choose to do so is because they believe familiarity with the published material will sell more books.

 

[Parmandur]

You can respect people's preferences while simultaneously choosing not to cater to them.

You can continue to feel aggrieved in as public a manner as you choose, of course, but I see no compelling argument that WotC has any moral obligation to reference previous material in their new designs. The only reason they would choose to do so is because they believe familiarity with the published material will sell more books.

I mean, they do actually care about not alienating fans, a lot: 4E taught them a valuable lesson on balance.

 

[Micah Sweet]

You can respect people's preferences while simultaneously choosing not to cater to them.

You can continue to feel aggrieved in as public a manner as you choose, of course, but I see no compelling argument that WotC has any moral obligation to reference previous material in their new designs. The only reason they would choose to do so is because they believe familiarity with the published material will sell more books.

They're not morally obligated, I think it would have been a gesture of goodwill and respect that they chose not to engage in. They don't have to make all their choices based on $.

And don't bring out the shareholders argument again.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I mean, they do actually care about not alienating fans, a lot: 4E taught them a valuable lesson on balance.

Show me evidence that they give one wit about not alienating fans. An actual example, not a logic argument.

 

[Parmandur]

Show me evidence that they give one wit about not alienating fans. An actual example, not a logic argument.

Concretely, just about every book published for 5E. Callbacks to old lore a kind everywhere, even in the newest books. They don't treat it as sacrosanct, but there isnreal affection in how Witcight treats Tasha and the LJN action figure characters, for example.

You, individually, may bot like everything WotC does. That does not.translate.to older fans in general being disaffected or left in the cold.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Concretely, just about every book published for 5E. Callbacks to old lore a kind everywhere, even in the newest books. They don't treat it as sacrosanct, but there isnreal affection in how Witcight treats Tasha and the LJN action figure characters, for example.

You, individually, may bot like everything WotC does. That does not.translate.to older fans in general being disaffected or left in the cold.

Mangling their old IP to keep making money off it is not respecting fans of the original material. The fact that some older fans still like what they're doing doesn't change that. There were good, useful things in Van Richten's Guide, but the book in general represents everything wrong with the modern WotC to me.

 

[Parmandur]

Mangling their old IP to keep making money off it is not respecting fans of the original material. The fact that some older fans still like what they're doing doesn't change that. There were good, useful things in Van Richten's Guide, but the book in general represents everything wrong with the modern WotC to me.

But not to everyone. And I dare say the designers like Perkins, Crawford Winninger et al respect themselves, and they have legit old school credentials. Perkins has produced work for every edition of D&D.

 

[TwoSix]

Mangling their old IP to keep making money off it is not respecting fans of the original material. The fact that some older fans still like what they're doing doesn't change that. There were good, useful things in Van Richten's Guide, but the book in general represents everything wrong with the modern WotC to me.

Personally, I would rather trust creators to do what feels right, then to put together focus groups of age 50+ gamers to arbitrate exactly how much change is "too much".

Maybe to you it's patently obvious as to what amount of change crosses the line from "respectful" to "disrespectful", but I assure you it is not so obvious to most of us.

 

[Parmandur]

Personally, I would rather trust creators to do what feels right, then to put together focus groups of age 50+ gamers to arbitrate exactly how much change is "too much".

Maybe to you it's patently obvious as to what amount of change crosses the line from "respectful" to "disrespectful", but I assure you it is not so obvious to most of us.

I mean, they fo work fastidious on customer feedback. But just because some are dissatisfied doesn't mean they failed to respect older customers.