D&D 5E No longer interested in 5e now

[Hassassin]

It's not about 4e resembling WoW or even video games. All editions of D&D resemble some video games or vice versa.

I think there is a parallel, though, with the kind of mechanics different editions of D&D use and the video games of the same time periods.

E.g. FPS games like Doom used to have a HP total that you had to protect and raise using resources you received for exploring the levels (first aid kits or whatever). Most current single player FPS games have done away with this mechanic in favor of always restoring health between fights. Pre-4e D&D is more like Doom, but 4e Healing Surges are closer to newer FPS games.

Whether these things are good for D&D depends on play style.

 

[El Mahdi]

And in the process split your customer base into any number of segments, each clamoring for different products that use up huge chunks of development time with a huge cast of designers and smaller production runs that cripple your margins. We saw how well this worked out for TSR (replace "editions" with "campaign settings" and you have an identical scenario), and you want to revive it.

You think you want something, but you really don't want it because it will mean another downward spiral for the hobby. You just don't know that you don't want it.

This reminds me of when WotC was telling us "you don't really want x...trust us, you really want y". And that worked out soooooo well...

 

[DaveMage]

This reminds me of when WotC was telling us "you don't really want x...trust us, you really want y". And that worked out soooooo well...

Yeah, but most of the people that said that have been fired.

 

[El Mahdi]

Doggone It! This is the last time I'm going to say this:

D&D does not resemble Video Games. Video Games resemble D&D!




Carry on...

 

[Njall]

EDIT: Avin, you may very well be right. I've never played a JRPG in my life and only know about their mechanics by osmosis. However, I'm not sure that invalidates the point. People who dislike 4e's similarity to video games have a right to say so.

Actually, it's not that it invalidates the point, it's that it makes it moot.
Let me explain: "video-gamey" doesn't mean anything by itself, so unless you add what you think makes it "video-gamey" and what you dislike about video games ( or about a particular video game ) the statement is just too vague to be useful, since there are tons of different video games out there, and even if you're considering a single video game ( like WoW, in this case ) understanding what you dislike about it is pretty much a shot in the dark.
Of course, if you're just going to explain what bothers you about a game in detail you might as well drop the "video-gamey" thing altogether (especially since it is often seen as a veiled insult).

 

[Alan Shutko]

If WotC did want to scan their old stuff again (to take advantage of better technologies) it would be much easier than it was before. With consumer-quality digital cameras, you can now scan books very quickly and nondestructively. I just jury-rigged a scanner with my digital camera, a piece of glass, and a cardboard box and scanned GAZ3 in about a half hour. More sophisticated builds are out there that take two pictures at once and can scan a 400 page book in an hour or less.

I put this together because I want digital copies for my own use of higher quality than the ones I bought when WotC offered them.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I find the video-gamey comparison amusing when almost every other D&D edition has video games. 4e doesn't. As for roles, look in the 2e PHB. You get the four roles of fighter, magic user, cleric, thief there. Which are only slightly fuzzied into defender, controller, leader, striker.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I find the video-gamey comparison amusing when almost every other D&D edition has video games. 4e doesn't.

What are you talking about, man?

As for roles, look in the 2e PHB. You get the four roles of fighter, magic user, cleric, thief there. Which are only slightly fuzzied into defender, controller, leader, striker.

The enhanced, focused, combat roles in 4e are actually quite remarkably different from the nature of the classes pre-4e. There are certainly similarities, but the differences are quite a bit bigger.

Ultimatley, inspiration is a weird thing. Some 4e mechanics have some pretty clear analogues to MMO mechanics. Some of those mechanics have roots in things deeper than an MMO, but were refined in an MMO context, and refined further in games like 4e. Some 4e mechanics are almost accidentally MMO mechanics, just because they're trying to solve similar problems.

It's not fair to 4e to say "HUR HUR IT'S JUST WOW ON PAPER." But it's also not fair to 4e to say "There's NOTHING from WoW in here and to say otherwise is to be an irrational hater!" Like with many things in life, a fundamentalist position is inherently untenable. 4e clearly cribs a few notes from MMOs, but it doesn't do so exclusively or ignorantly. Some of those crib notes work better than others (forex, I don't think the enhanced, focused, combat roles do anyone any real favors, though I respect the goal they set out with as a real D&D-centric goal).

A 2e wizard clearly is not a "controller" any more than a 2e thief is a "striker." To conflate them seems to miss the real advances 4e has made (in cribbing from some MMO notes) on how D&D combat should be conceptualized and balanced, advances that 2e probably could have used years earlier to be a better game.

Shrug. Inspiration is wierd.

 

[Ratinyourwalls]

In a perfect world, we'd have two editions: one for the haters, elitists, edition warriors and negative people, and one for the rest of us.

The latter wouldn't sell well because there isn't enough of a potential consumer base.

 

[Dannager]

This reminds me of when WotC was telling us "you don't really want x...trust us, you really want y". And that worked out soooooo well...

I'm not sure what you're trying to do, here. Are you telling us that people always know that they'll be happy with what they want, even if they have no real knowledge of the topic or the consequences of their preference?

I'm pointing out that people sometimes ask for things that they think they want, without fully understanding the consequences that their decision would have, and that sometimes those consequences actually mean that the end result of what they think they want is actually something they don't want at all.

Do you disagree?