OK then I misunderstood what you meant by balance. My view of balance is how well do one class or race compare to another and in that aspect 1st and 2nd edition was very imbalanced. The races being balanced against humans by level limits were one of the worst ideas ever IMO, you function at 100% effectiveness until you hit a certain level, then you are out of the game (if you want to have levels). Wizards were so much more powerful than fighters that it wasn't funny at high levels and very weak at low levels. The thief could be replaced by spell casters by lvl 5-6. Above lvl 9 it was essentially meaningless to advance as a fighter; sure the lower THAC0 is nice but otherwise it's just 3 HP per level.Ty said:Med Stud,
AD&D as a base system was fairly balanced as I recall. It was no more unbalanced than any other system. I'm afraid you have misconstrued my statements about the balance of AD&D v. 3.5. I am saying that AD&D was fairly easy to play out to high levels without extreme amounts of work by the DM and Players. In effect though, generally, intelligent people play these games. They will find ways to break the system any which way you go. I gave up on game balance loooooooong ago. No such thing.
As for the market research questions, yeah I do question their abilities. I've seen and participated in their surveys. The resulting actions they take however, don't mesh with their surveys. Besides, if implementation from market research was as easy as you think, GM and Ford would still have a stranglehold on the U.S. auto market.
Ty said:Great. History does include the Gettysburg address. You get a gold star. If history was unimportant to D&D, then why did WotC release the 30 Years of D&D compendium and why is there a "History of the Miniatures" on the frontpages of the D&D website?
It's because the nostalgia and history of the game is what keeps bringing back the old folks like me.
You know, the one's with the stable careers (cash) breeding the next generation of geeks to inherit the hobby...
As for the circle of D&D players I know, none play World of Warcraft. None intend on purchasing 4th Edition unless it happens to be extremely good. We all happen to have multiple children and incomes in the top 10% for the country though. Wow, Hong is wrong again.
Ty said:It's good all you "young whipper snappers" have a place to congregate and practice your comedy routines.
Ty said:As for the circle of D&D players I know, none play World of Warcraft. None intend on purchasing 4th Edition unless it happens to be extremely good. We all happen to have multiple children and incomes in the top 10% for the country though. Wow, Hong is wrong again.
Cool! I'm still a young whipper-snapper at 40! I've been playing D&D since '81. So, while I might not be the most venerable member of the D&D playing crowd, I ain't no beginner either. Or, in other words, don't assume you know who is posting until you've met them. It ain't kosher.Ty said:It's good all you "young whipper snappers" have a place to congregate and practice your comedy routines.
In my last group of 7 (Hi, David!), only one did not play WoW. Yet we still managed to meet for our bi-weekly game. Fact is, the only reason I stopped playing was that David moved waaaaaay across town and I went through a divorce that required a lot of my time.As for the circle of D&D players I know, none play World of Warcraft.
I might not be in the top 10% of the country, but I make a six digit income and have a kid... What's the point of this?None intend on purchasing 4th Edition unless it happens to be extremely good. We all happen to have multiple children and incomes in the top 10% for the country though.
If said designer was the ONLY designer of 4e, I might have some qualms about it. But seeing as he's surrounded by very capable people with proven track records, I'm not too worried about it. From the posts done by current and previous WotC employees I can pretty much figure out that WotC is not a dictatorship and the "lead" designer is more of a coordinator of effort of the other designers while giving some input of his own.
Ty said:ACTUAL POINT HERE FOR THOSE WITH SHORT ATTENTION SPANS:
It doesn't cause anyone here any concern whatsoever that a lead designer for D&D entirely dismissed two editions of the game; didn't even play them?
Oh yes, that's right. This isn't about engaging in an honest discussion as to D&D's past and where it is headed. This is a stand up comedy routine.
I'm 30, started playing one of the mid-80s versions of Basic, played through all the subsequent editions, plus many of the assorted the d20 spin-offs, and I'm looking forward to 4E.mhensley said:For the record, I am not young (42), started playing with the holmes edition of basic, and am really looking forward to 4e.
His anecdotal evidence is pointless. My group range in age from early 20s to early 30s. None of them play WoW. We're looking forward to 4E. My previous group were all mid-20s, and maybe one of them played WoW, but wasn't a "career player". They're looking forward to 4E.Your anecdotal evidence is pointless. Most of my group are avid players of WoW. In fact, they played WoW before they played D&D. There are also a large number of WoW players at my office. I don't know anyone there who plays D&D.
As many others have said, not at all. In fact, one of the things I've most enjoyed about seeing the designer blogs has been seeing them talk about all of the games that they've played that aren't D&D. As someone who hasn't been in the hobby too long, I enjoy hearing about alternate systems and gain considerable confidence from knowing that D&D 4E isn't going to be solely the result of 30-some years of intellectual incest.Ty said: