Has D&D jumped the shark?

[scadgrad]

...
It's really hard to take your arguements seriously with not-so-witty remarks like Wot$. However, I never said they have the make the game more complex. Adding in new, or variant as I like to see it, mechanics doesn't mean they are making the game more complex. They are simply giving DM's and players a possible new way to play....

Oh come on, just havin' a little fun at WotC's expense. God knows I've gave 'em enough of my bread over the years to be allowed a snipe or two don't you think?

And Dude, I said "friend" to try and be civil over the whole affair. I was simply following the train of thought that you, and others in the More Rules=Good camp in this thread, seem to be espousing i.e. if WotC (trying to play nicey-nice here) puts out a new book full of crunchy goodness it adds to the game. If I'd wanted to call you a fanboy, I'd come right out and say it.

But, and just to restate a position that's already been stated, if a player comes to a game and says hey, I want to work toward the UberKilly Chosen of Bob the God of, like Really Ultimate Killy Stuff PrC from the new Races of Yummy Goodnes, it ...

wait for it...

does add complexity to the game because now I, the overworked and underpayed DM, must review that PrC, and in all fairness the entire contents of the new Crunch Book. The new crunch adds complexity because its sole goal is to entice players to use it.

You don't know jack about me, so don't assume that just because I defended the presentation of new rules as being an WotC fanboy. Try to stick to the conversation instead of making ignorant attacks...

I believe I have been, though trying to do so in a rather lighthearted manner. Again, not trying to pull your chain, but looks like I did. Mea Culpa. Pax Dude.

So you like it when 3rd party publishers push the envelope of what the D20 system can do, but when WotC does it, it's just them adding complexity to the system?

Well, that's not a bad stab at it, but those new spells were produced way, way back in the early days before The Flood. As it stands now, I pretty much glance at and quickly pass on most of the stuff that Monte's putting out now. Still, those are very, very damn good books and were quite unique when they were introduced.

 

[scadgrad]

There was no end of complaining about TSR releasing too much stuff under 2nd ed. And then they went bankrupt.

Now, now. One mustn't use logic in these arguments. That would be cheating

Not sure why you and I are the only ones in the thread that see the analogy. The biggest difference is that unlike TSR, WotC has a rather large safety net to fall back on.

 

[Psion]

Well, that depends on exactly what you mean by stagnate,

When I say game, I mean "the activity of playing a particular game across all the players that played it at one time or another."

By stagnate, I mean "the number of groups and players actively playing it withers away to a miniscule fraction of what it once was."

i.e., I mean it in the Ryan Dancey sense.

 

[Psion]

Now, now. One mustn't use logic in these arguments. That would be cheating

That's logic?

I won't dispute the deluge was a vector. But stating two facts without relating them isn't "logic". There was a lot more involved in TSR's demise than the number of products they put out.

Similarly, the existence of a deluge then does not mean that we are in a similar situation now. (As my gaming budget would attest. My gaming budget is healthy right now because the last two months have been so light.)

 

[Desdichado]

Which isn't totally different from the sales perspective after all, then. I think sales stagnation and overall player base stagnation are probably directly and strongly correllated.

And I agree that without a steady flow of new product that doesn't completely retread old ground is essential to avoiding stagnation of that type overall.

 

[Kanegrundar]

And Dude, I said "friend" to try and be civil over the whole affair. I was simply following the train of thought that you, and others in the More Rules=Good camp in this thread, seem to be espousing i.e. if WotC (trying to play nicey-nice here) puts out a new book full of crunchy goodness it adds to the game. If I'd wanted to call you a fanboy, I'd come right out and say it.

Where did I say that more rules = a good campaign? All I said is I like seeing variant rules that push the boundaries. Sometimes those rules make it into my game, but smost time they don't. I never said that I use all those said rules. IMC, I've actually parred down several things to speed play up without removing too many options (from my list of OK material) for the players. You don't have to come right out and say something to have said it, BTW.

But, and just to restate a position that's already been stated, if a player comes to a game and says hey, I want to work toward the UberKilly Chosen of Bob the God of, like Really Ultimate Killy Stuff PrC from the new Races of Yummy Goodnes, it ...

wait for it...

does add complexity to the game because now I, the overworked and underpayed DM, must review that PrC, and in all fairness the entire contents of the new Crunch Book. The new crunch adds complexity because its sole goal is to entice players to use it..

Just because a player wants to play with the newly published race with a newly published PrC doesn't mean for one second that you have to allow it. The DM should be in control of the game. Compromise from time to time, but essentially, he's the one putting the game together so what he says should be law.

I believe I have been, though trying to do so in a rather lighthearted manner. Again, not trying to pull your chain, but looks like I did. Mea Culpa. Pax Dude.

I get that way when people twist what I say in directions that it never went and when they assume they know something about me in which they don't. I didn't take it as light-hearted. It didn't read as light-hearted, but if that's how you intended it, fine. Let's leave it at that.

Kane

 

[helium3]

I think applying the concept of "jumped the shark" to anything other than TV series means "jumped the shark" has jumped the shark

I think that when the phrase "jumped the shark" has "jumped the shark" then it can be said that life itself has "jumped the shark" and we're all doomed, unless someone can come up with a new slang-phrase for "this thing here now irreversibly sucks balls."

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

If a Player is creating friction in a group because of wanting to use supplimental/optional books, the problem is the Player, not the books.

Maybe so, but when my players make those puppy eyes and ask me: "Can I use this stuff? Can I? Can I?", I find it hard to resist...

 

[Crothian]

Maybe so, but when my players make those puppy eyes and ask me: "Can I use this stuff? Can I? Can I?", I find it hard to resist...

I wish I had that problem. My players are all aobut sticking to a few books saying they can't possible use the 10 thousand books I have and try to use.

 

[Henry]

Maybe so, but when my players make those puppy eyes and ask me: "Can I use this stuff? Can I? Can I?", I find it hard to resist...

You need to channel less spirit of Doctor Doolittle, and more Cruella DeVille...