Is the D&D fanbase too divided?

[BryonD]

Oh, so you're really just dredging up the old roll-player vs role-player arguement, about how real roleplayers didn't need all these rules and player-oriented stuff? I mean, is that honestly what you're on about here, because that certainly makes it sound like you are.

Sorry, that doesn't fly and never has. It's a tired and stupid cliche right up there with the jokes about walking ten miles to school every day in the snow, uphill, both ways. I like tons of options and classes and PrC's and all sorts of other stuff; nothing in that is going to make me a better roleplayer or detract from my coming up with deep and rich character background. A five- to seven-page background is normal for me and most of my gaming group yet we love pouring through new rules and fiddling with character creation and weighing the merits of feat A vs Feat B.

Yep, exactly right.

It is funny to me how the people who claim to be the most hard core roleplayers of them all so often end up being the same ones who claim they are in need of more RP stuff in books.
Being a fan of non-crunch is one thing. But I find that I knew how to play pretend as a child. Pretending to be a wizard is the part I don't need a book for. Getting a good system that mechanically models that wizard, I'm always on the lookout for more and better ways to compliment my RP ability with that.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

D&D is at its heart a social game. The rules and such are simple the framework so a book or five on how to conduct social gatherings both in-game and out of game as opposed to splat after splat full of classes is not out of the question.

I'm not grogging your point here, especially in repsonse to mine. I'm trying to remember, going all the way back to my Moldvay Basic D&D set; I do not recall there ever being a lot of emphasis on setting creation, roleplaying or social skills in any D&D book

I love the DMG2! Excellent book! Also, just because you don't like something does not mean it will not work. One has only to take a quick look at certain threads or how long splats stay on the book shelf at the local bookstore to see how they are not selling.

No real roleplayer wants rehashed rules and PrCs in book after book.
~~~

Did I say I didn't like it? Did you read my post? I just said that multiple versions of the book are unlikely to sell. Splatbooks sell because they offer new material - and they do sell, regardless of what people say about how long copies sit on shelves of local stores that are competing with discount online portals like Amazon. If they didn't I promise you, WotC would not be printing them. Back to the point; five more books saying the exact same thing in slightly different ways won't likely sell. You do realize that WotC is a business, right? They have to actually sell books in order to stay in business, and I see no evidence that they are not selling books using their current model.

In all honesty, if you are this passionate about this topic, why don't you write and publish something yourself? Why does WotC have to do it? If such a book were to be so desparately needed, stop complaining about it and take action yourself.

Me, I'll selectively buy the splatbooks I need, be it from WotC or a third party publisher, and I won't worry that someone isn't out there holding my hand, trying to teach me and others to be a better roleplayer. I'll take that repsonsibility into my own hands and do what I feel is comfortable, and game with people of a like mind.

Last point: I have yet to experience any kind of arguements or terrible social behavior in any group I have been in that could possibly be attributed to anything other than individual personalities. The books aren't leading to any increase in anger in my experience, and the people I've gamed with a buying WotC books like gangbusters. Since my experiences are as valid as yours, I will say that without a doubt D&D is stronger than ever and more people are playing with good roleplaying, exciting and creative settings and adventures than ever before.

 

[LordofIllusions]

Perhaps greater access to information gives people more to argue about and there are certainly more choices to be made about character development in 3.5 but I don't think D&D is more combatively divided, perhaps more complex. I think it depends on what you accept from each other as acceptable behavior.

Oh come on. A brat is a brat, I don't sit back when a little rodent is popping my tires and say "Hmmm, I wonder is this acceptable or not..."

Not the tolerance of bad behavior speech again please. If the gamers are messed up they are messed up.

I agree that Gamers are a quarrelsome lot but in 20+ years of play that has always been the case. I don't agree that any books for a hobby bear responsibility for the actions of the players. Rude people don't get a free ride by blaming how many books they have.

I never said that having books is bad. I said that they don't put out material that improves the social air of the game. I also said that they should focus more on the social air as opposed to dropping worthless splat after splat with just new feats in them.

I think a certain amount of fragmentation is unavoidable. Writer A mostly does his\her best job on what they see as different not the same. If you don't like Writer A ignore them.

Also don't forget we have all the previous editions of the game, and other games, as influences. It used to be hugely different to go from Runequest to D&D or AD&D and (in my circle) Traveler was something strange and exotic. Today I see more competition for online gaming dollars and more presence of alternate game systems in backwaters and people's experience. I feel like we are a smaller market with more publishers trying to be viable on what we buy.

Rules and game expansions give us more to talk about (and have opinions about). The net is such a good medium for sharing game creativity. You really don't need monster books anymore for example. The changes have put us in each others faces more often for good and bad. I play Fantasy Grounds and I have never had so many possible traditional pen and paper games available to me in 20+ years. My books get a workout and my car doesn't .


Sigurd

I agree there is alot more available but I would like to see more about roleplaying from WotC as opposed to worthless PrCs and feats.

~~~

 

[LordofIllusions]

You did a good job to make sure it wasn't though. But after the all too serious dungeon and Dragon Magazine issues of the last week or so we needed some far out unsupported rants to laugh out.

I love how you label arguments that differ with your own as unsupported and as rants.

~~~

 

[GreatLemur]

That was an example. Moreover I know plenty of 2E GMs that used the flavor of various settings to generate certain elements of their worlds.

That's nice if that's what you're into, I guess. Personally, I'd rather pull inspiration from everywhere but other RPG settings. And, honestly, providing plot and setting inspiration and providing the mechanics required for whatever plots and settings result are such fundamentally different tasks that I'd rather see them kept separate. The recent trend of system neutral campaign settings is a particularly cool thing, I think.

Eberron mimics Exalted.

That's news to me. Care to explain that one? From what I understand of each setting, they haven't got much in common besides some very standard fantasy clichés.

 

[Desdichado]

I own the setting and many of the books. It's a mishmash of Exalted, Iron Kingdoms, and a few other settings. Nothing original really...but hey if you like it more power to ya.

Well, I think we've certainly established one fact: the hypothetical D&D Players Guide to Proper Gamer Manners could certainly be put to one use--we could give it to you to read. It seems like you could really use it.

 

[Mallus]

I said that they don't put out material that improves the social air of the game.

Pardon me, I must have been napping when D&D became some kind of Utopian social movement.

I though it was about elf-y power fantasies, Dorito consumption, and dice.

 

[Crothian]

I love how you label arguments that differ with your own as unsupported and as rants.

A rant is not a negative term and there are many rants by people I agree with. The fact that you make many claims in this thread but don't offer support is well documented by your own posts.

I've asked you to offer some support and you have not. So, I'll try again. Please state a clear thesis and support for it. We have you claiming Eberron is a rip off of Exalted, that role players don't like prestige classes and feats, etc.

 

[LordofIllusions]

Oh, so you're really just dredging up the old roll-player vs role-player arguement, about how real roleplayers didn't need all these rules and player-oriented stuff? I mean, is that honestly what you're on about here, because that certainly makes it sound like you are.

Sorry, that doesn't fly and never has. It's a tired and stupid cliche right up there with the jokes about walking ten miles to school every day in the snow, uphill, both ways. I like tons of options and classes and PrC's and all sorts of other stuff; nothing in that is going to make me a better roleplayer or detract from my coming up with deep and rich character background. A five- to seven-page background is normal for me and most of my gaming group yet we love pouring through new rules and fiddling with character creation and weighing the merits of feat A vs Feat B.

Sorry, that doesn't fly and never had. It's a tired new age and stupid cliche right up there with feminist gendercide claims, alien gods, the glass ceiling, addiction to MMORPGs, global warming hysteria, and The Da Vinci Code. I like roleplaying with books that discuss roleplaying; nothing in that is going to detract from the millions of video games available for those that don't like roleplaying.



~~~

 

[LordofIllusions]

Well, I think we've certainly established one fact: the hypothetical D&D Players Guide to Proper Gamer Manners could certainly be put to one use--we could give it to you to read. It seems like you could really use it.

That's a personal attack. I fail to see why you have resorted to attacking me personally.

~~~