Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="lutecius" data-source="post: 4391453" data-attributes="member: 60332">I don't know about wotc’s other activities but I really don’t like the direction dnd has taken:<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/1.gif"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":1:" title="One    :1:" data-shortname=":1:" /> Marketing considerations affecting game design too much. - Replacing old stuff with more popular options is ok. But I don’t buy that basic classes, monsters or spell types were only delayed because designers needed time to "get them right". It’s not like they were taken by surprise. If something as basic as druid or summoning didn’t work, it should have been fixed before tackling new races and classes or obscure monsters.I don’t buy the page count excuse either (it's not like people were clamouring for 30+ pages of magic items in the phb).The game feels like it was purposely made incomplete. Of course things were left out to sell later books.- I also suspect that classes were made narrower and multiclassing was nerfed to prevent too much customisation and make new classes more appealing. If it was just done to avoid balance issues, then that's lazy/rushed design (not a marketing desision but not a good thing either) - The increased emphasis on combat movement and miniatures smells fishy too.<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/2.gif"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":2:" title="Two    :2:" data-shortname=":2:" /> Expecting fans to buy anything dnd, no matter how poorly produced.- Cheap printing, binding and editing for an increased price.- Recycled art. If all of it were outstanding pieces that couldn’t be matched, I would understand. But come on, the Succubus is the shopped half of an older cartoony picture.Also, a lot of the new art feels awfully rushed to me, but it could just be a matter of taste, not the lack of time and money invested in it.- Half of the last two miniature sets looks like something from a happy meal. And the few tiefling and dragonborn (core races) minis are rare?- So far DDI is a joke, there is not much more to say about it. Oh yes, there is: as if charging for individual virtual minis on top of the monthly fee wasn’t enough, they actually thought about randomizing them too.As for the online content, I’m not enthused about paying for the right to playtest new material before it's published or for articles that would have been free web enhancements in the past. But maybe I’m just spoiled.- R&C and W&M. Charging for ads and outdated previews, at a time when the expected online content was almost nonexistent. There is not enough exclusive art or design notes in them to justify the price.<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/3.gif"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":3:" title="Three    :3:" data-shortname=":3:" /> The GSL. If the D20 variants weren't serious competitors like M.Mearls says, why prohibit them now? Why prevent anyone from "fixing" 4e for those who may not like it as is? Who knows, it may even give wotc ideas for 5e.<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/4.gif"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":4:" title="Four    :4:" data-shortname=":4:" /> Some might argue that it’s nice of wotc staffers to post in forums and address the fans’ concerns because they don’t really have to but I’ve found some of their posts rather disingenuous or even arrogant. Also, you can't really play the "friendly community" card when you have a personal stake in the discussed material.In conclusion: 2. Bad WotC! Bad!</blockquote>

Verification