I started to post this in Miscellaneous, but I started ranting so I moved it here. I'm kinda torked off about something.
On two different messageboards now (rpg.net and ENWorld) people have taken a snippet of my gamingreport.com interview and used it as support for 3.5 being bad, as though a quote from me is some kind of evidence.
On rpg.net, the majority of the thread was people calling each other names, so... whatever.
On ENWorld, however, people posted a lot of comments, which I tried to very quickly refute (by pointing out that basically people were putting words in my mouth) but I did a miserable job because I was in a hurry and then the thread got closed.
So I came here, to get a few things off my chest, in case the misconceptions continue. Honestly, I hope most of you don't care about any of this. I'm just venting.
So first off, here is the quote people kept referring to:
"I personally think it's too soon to revise the books and have it on good authority it's got more to do with economics than what's best for the game."
Here's the very next line, which no one refers to:
"That said, the creative team for D&D over the years has a long history of taking the lemons handed them from the business people and making lemonade. I suspect that they've done that here."
So I'm not anti-3.5. I've said publicly (and will continue to say) that some of the changes are good, and some are, I think, mistakes. But that's true of every WotC product and every d20 product I've seen--there's some good and some bad. Not an earthshaking observation on my part.
But people point out to me (regarding the first quote) "of course WotC did it for the money, they're a company."
Duh.
All I was trying to say was that the initial impetus for the decision to do 3.5 was to reinvigorate D&D profits--no one was saying "man, this game needs an overhaul." Not players, not designers. That's it. That's all I was trying to say. (I guess it's an issue for me because that's NOT true of 3.0. 3E started with the designers clamoring for it--even before WotC bought TSR.) WotC is trying to claim that this isn't the case, and that they only did 3.5 because players demanded it and I think that's crappy.
So then, a bunch of people start saying "who cares what Monte thinks?" forgetting that I didn't come to the messageboard and make that post--someone else did. I don't expect anyone to care what I think. Every time someone wants to do an interview with me, I'm a little amazed. But gamingreport.com asked me the question and I gave them the straight-up, truthful answer. (It's my goal in interviews to be forthright, and not dodge the touchy issues--if someone's going to go to the trouble of asking, they should get the real answer, even if it's a touchy one.) Somehow, the implication becomes that I'm foisting my opinion on people. It makes me want to pull my hair out.
But to top it all off, some guy then says that I'm being hypocritical because I'm coming out with Arcana Unearthed, which is like 3.5, but I'm not giving it away free like WotC.
Arcana Unearthed is not my version of 3.5. It's not meant to make you throw away your old PH. It's meant to offer a fresh look. I fricken' LOVE D&D. I was working on AU much longer than I knew of 3.5. It's really got nothing to do with 3.5.
(And the assertation that WotC is giving away 3.5 for free is absurd. That may be the result, but it's not at ALL the intent. WotC is hoping--nay, gambling--that no one will use just the SRD, and will buy the new books. The SRD is for d20 publishers, not fans. Sure, gamers can look at the SRD too, but that's not why it's there. Don't believe me? Scan the PH and post it on your website and see how fast you get an email from WotC legal.)
D&D was going to need a revision at some point. I'm not all "don't touch my perfect work on 3.0." There were things that needed changing. In some cases, I don't think they changed enough. My own personal business thrives on the success of WotC's D&D business, so I'm personally praying for 3.5's success. Don't give me accusations of "sour grapes" or whatever--I'm concerned for the game (in a general way) and I'm concerned for the business (in a specific way). I have my doubts about what's being done, and they way it's being done, but I'm not anti-3.5.
OK. I'm done venting now. Please do NOT use this thread to start arguments about the validity of 3.5.
