D&D 4E In terms of theme, tone, and spirit, I hope 4e . . .

[Nifft]

Wow, I totally see what you're talking about there. I'm swearing off Reynolds forever!

Wayne Reynolds is my god, too.

Cheers, -- N

 

[WayneLigon]

The Innovators originated, by grace of being born first. They may not have been the best, but they were there.

There comes a point when living in the past is a shackle that must be broken. You can certainly give a nod of respect to what came before, but you can't create something, then continue to do the same thing and never change.

Customers wanted D&D to change, and TSR did not listen. Innovation also consists of making substancial improvements and changes (3E), not tiny ones (2E). D&D needed to change, and make significant changes, to stay alive. TSR didn't.

They thought they could do the same thing they had been and they'd stay on top. They quickly found out that ain't how it works. The only reason D&D is still the bestselling game there is, is that it changed. I think more changes will be forthcoming, not any form of return to what was done in the past. That should be expected, indeed must be expected.

So WOTC is the innovator, here.

 

[Lanefan]

Customers wanted D&D to change, and TSR did not listen. Innovation also consists of making substancial improvements and changes (3E), not tiny ones (2E). D&D needed to change, and make significant changes, to stay alive. TSR didn't.

Disagree completely. TSR did make changes. The problem was, they made the wrong changes (e.g. dropping Illusionists, Monks, etc.; dropping demons and devils; over-simplifying), and might very well have been better off leaving more things unchanged until-unless they thought of better ideas.

They thought they could do the same thing they had been and they'd stay on top. They quickly found out that ain't how it works. The only reason D&D is still the bestselling game there is, is that it changed. I think more changes will be forthcoming, not any form of return to what was done in the past. That should be expected, indeed must be expected.

Isn't it better to admit some parts of each version of the game were the best at doing what they did, and keep those, then fix what's left that needs fixing?

Lanefan

 

[Doug McCrae]

I can't seem to find a bigger image of this on Google or anything

Your Google-Fu is weak.

Khyber battle

I would've embedded it but it's slightly too wide.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Isn't it better to admit some parts of each version of the game were the best at doing what they did, and keep those, then fix what's left that needs fixing?

Yeah, but no one agrees on what those parts are. Market research is the only way.

I liked most of the 2e changes, the rules clean up, but not the sops to the mothers of America.

 

[Fifth Element]

Watch the movie again some time when you get the chance. If you notice, the narration the entire time is from the viewpoint of Dilios who was the only survivor of the battle, and he's giving the narration to an army of Spartans prior to a battle.

Long story short, it's a propaganda tale.

Of course the enemies were a million strong run by an 8 foot god with monsters etc.

I'm just surprised Xerxes didn't shoot lightning bolts out of his eyes and fireballs out his arse.

Um, yeah, I did actually pay attention the first time, but thanks for the advice.

This, of course, does nothing whatsoever to refute my assertion that the original comment about 300 was with respect to its visuals, not its historical accuracy.

 

[FireLance]

The artwork in D&D today is spectacular. It really drives home the word "fantasy" and "imagination". Sure, who the hell can really wield a sword thrice their size? But IMAGINE if you could...how awesome would that be?

Indeed.

Imagination: you can use it for more than just dragons and wizards, you know.

 

[Banshee16]

I have a sickness, then.

The thing is, there's a reason medieval armor and weapons looked like they did: Because that's what worked. While there's certainly some room for artistic deviation, and I'm all for D&D showing a wide range of styles, changing the baseline often creates armor or weapons that are absolutely non-functional.

What I'd really like to see is more of a mix. Even though it doesn't appeal to me as much, I don't mind D&D having the wilder, more out-there equipment, because I know that appeals to some people. But I'd also like to see more artwork that does at least offer a nod toward historical accuracy. Since D&D can have multiple cultures, and even has multiple worlds, I see no reason why the artwork can't reflect both.

I'll make a point....I was really unsure about the whole "spike" look at first. Sure, it's impractical, according to our current understanding of medieval combat etc. Maybe some spikes were possible? Who knows? Maybe spikes were never added into historical armour because Earth wasn't populated by 80' long fire breathing lizards from hell, and assorted other creatures capable (and likely) to swallow a grown man whole.

When you're just fighting other men, a sword, shield, and smooth armour designed to deflect sword blows is really what you need. But I think that if I also had to worry about getting munched by a wyvern or something, I might want to add some spikes and razors into the mix, in the hope that they'll deter the creature from swallowing me.

Banshee

 

[Kae'Yoss]

I might want to add some spikes and razors into the mix, in the hope that they'll deter the creature from swallowing me.

Wrong approach: Those beasties usually have DR and high ACs, so your spikes won't bother them. What you need is perfectly smooth, and preferrably greased, armour, so you'll slide right through the enemy.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

The 2e pictures. Hands down. Again, this is taste, but they evoke my idea of a swords and sorcery or high fantasy game, not the new artwork.

HOw can slavish devotion to our own world's culture and imagery evoke FANTASY?