Defining its own Mythology

[Rechan]

"just as there are still more people playing 1e today than 3.x."

Woah. Who said that?

I'd really like to see the numbers for that statement.

 

[Doug McCrae]

D&D's own mythology is not that wonderful. Kender, hawt drow chixxorz, giant space hamsters, Drizzt, Elminster. The creative work of people like REHoward and Tolkien is probably superior in every respect. D&D's great strength is its rules, not its mythology. So it should be game first, then create a background which supports the game. Which is what they seem to be doing in 4e.

 

[Rechan]

Now, folks (such as yourself) come along and say that they only play D&D because of its branding (i.e., because it is well known, and hence easier to find players for). You'd like to change the game, removing the features that cause those who like the game to like it, under the (IMHO) mistaken impression that the name "Dungeons & Dragons" will make it easier to find players for the game you wished to play (which is clearly something else).

No. I also like the changes in 4e. I think the dragonborn and tieflings are a breath of fresh air compared to the Tolkien worship. And yet somehow this insults Your D&D.

I, OTOH, think that the reason that the game you wished to play is not as popular as D&D is because it fails the "Gygaxian hodgepodge" test, and that changing D&D to make the core game play as you would have it do so will not ultimately make your game of choice more popular, but make 4e less popular than its predecessors.....just as there are still more people playing 1e today than 3.x.

You would be wrong. Living in the Bible Belt of the US means few gamers, period. It has nothing to do with fantasy gaming at all. Hodgepodge D&D, superheros or Serenity RPG, there's barely any gamers at all to play them in the first place.

 

[Voadam]

Are they still gonna use Thor? I thought there was an article where they said they dropped the idea of using real world gods as sample deities in the PHB.

I haven't seen one saying such. Most of my 4e info though comes from the ENWorld collected blurbs though.

If you find that quote I'd like to see a link to it.

 

[Doug McCrae]

D&D is not really generic fantasy. Okay, there are rules for knights, wizards (with weird spellcasting) and dragons (so long as you like a spectrum of them). But there's really weird D&Disms too like the arcane/divine divide. And the way the game works - four person party, no clear hero, lots of fights, lots of healing, flash-bang magic, spellcasters common, magic items common, a plethora of monsters - doesn't look like any work of fiction.

 

[Odhanan]

Rechan: Could you please try to be less offensive towards people's feelings and opinions?

I'm starting to really feel offended by what you write and how you write it.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Rechan: Could you please try to be less offensive towards people's feelings and opinions?

I'm starting to really feel offended by what you write and how you write it.

That goes for me as well.

 

[resistor]

That goes for me as well.

Thirded.

 

[Rechan]

Rechan: Could you please try to be less offensive towards people's feelings and opinions?

I'm starting to really feel offended by what you write and how you write it.

Move your mouse over to my name on the left side, and left click. At the very bottom of the little window that pops up, there will be the text "Add Rechan to your ignore list". Click on that.

Seriously, if what I've said offends you, then there's little I can do except stop posting. I'm being tame compared to message boards, compared to the arguments here. A few weeks ago someone on Enworld said that they wanted the fun/style of a certain type of gaming to be put into a sack and thrown into a river until it drowns, never to be found again. I've not broken any message board rules (unless a mod would like to correct me there).

 

[pawsplay]

Seriously, if what I've said offends you, then there's little I can do except stop posting.

Or, you know, trying to be nicer when you do post.