D&D 4E Really?? Is RPGA really the best place to test 4e

[Paradigm]

Except there are different aims of playtesting and nobody is suitable for dealing with all of them. RPGA members might be perfect for finding every loophole that can destroy issues of "balance" in the game, as sidonunspa seems to have experienced with Living Arcanis.

At the same time, RPGA members might be considered to be a little more "hardcore" gamers who are willing to accept complexity in the game. They may not be the best for realizing that some rules are too complex and bog down play, especially for more "casual" gamers.

You want a balance of hardcore rules lawyers and more casual players because you want to satisfy both groups. The rules lawyers will serve to maim your system, putting together massively overpowered combinations which you may or may not want to eliminate (only ones that ruin fun need to be removed) and the casual players will serve to help you make the game more accessible to the general public.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

One only has to read the thread to see the people who have gotten the most heated on this thread are people who feel the OP has critisized them and they don't like it.

That's okay, because while I've never met you and therefore have very limited experience playing in any of your games, I'm completely confident that I can say that you are not, in any way, shape, or form, playing real D&D.

Sure, you may be playing something which shares some similarities with the true game of D&D, but let's face it: you're really just pretending in order to make yourself feel better.

Because of this, neither you, nor anyone in your group, should be playtesting the newest version of D&D. After all, if you can't handle real D&D today, how can you possibly be expected to have any meaningful opinions on the D&D of tomorrow?

...

That attitude doesn't come off as even the tiniest bit insulting to you?

With tongue firmly in cheek,

 

[DonTadow]

Prove it. Prove to me that a majority of people who play D&D aren't in it for the hack factor. Considering EVERY other gamer in the world thinks that this is EXACTLY why we play D&D, I ask you to prove them wrong. I ask you to prove conclusively that D&D gamers in the majority are into deep immersion gaming and that the fact that 90% of the ruleset revolves around combat has no impact on what happens at the table.

I'll be over here in the corner waiting.

Come now husar, we've both been around here long enough to know that hack and slash is a very small minority of gamer. Go ahead, put up a thread. Everyone likes combat, but few like games that are little more than combat.

 

[brehobit]

Thanks for that broad brush you just painted everyone with. It is broad brush generalizations, similar to this one I just quoted, which get the OP in trouble.Again. Most RPGA play is done in the home. It isn't even close.

Realizing this is getting too meta for the thread....

Wow. I read his comments as: There are people being critical of the RPGA. There are people who are upset about those being critical of the RPGA. He indicated that the negative reaction by the second group seems more condescending/insulting. It's a fair observation. Perhaps not accurate, but fair.

 

[Nifft]

Terrible people accrete wherever it is difficult to remove them.
This is why you see embarrassing people in many hobbies and government jobs.

Cheers, -- N

 

[brehobit]

I'll just throw in my 5c here.

100% of the RPGA events I've played in have been positive experiences, and had a lot of role-playing. One of them was 75% or so (roughly) interpersonal roleplaying, with very little combat.

Out of curiosity, was this with a random group, people you largely knew, or something else? And was the RP one a "living" adventure (characters taken from adventure to adventure) or one with pregens supplied?

Mark

 

[DonTadow]

That's okay, because while I've never met you and therefore have very limited experience playing in any of your games, I'm completely confident that I can say that you are not, in any way, shape, or form, playing real D&D.

Sure, you may be playing something which shares some similarities with the true game of D&D, but let's face it: you're really just pretending in order to make yourself feel better.

Because of this, neither you, nor anyone in your group, should be playtesting the newest version of D&D. After all, if you can't handle real D&D today, how can you possibly be expected to have any meaningful opinions on the D&D of tomorrow?

...

That attitude doesn't come off as even the tiniest bit insulting to you?

With tongue firmly in cheek,

If you play in a system that has 20 pages of differences between that and the main game then you are indeed not playing dungeons and dragons as written. One page of house rules is one thing but 20 someodd pages is a big distinction. If it comes off insulting thats your own guilt telling you it may be true.

 

[D'karr]

If you play in a system that has 20 pages of differences between that and the main game then you are indeed not playing dungeons and dragons as written. One page of house rules is one thing but 20 someodd pages is a big distinction. If it comes off insulting thats your own guilt telling you it may be true.

Now that made me laugh...

 

[kenmarable]

If you play in a system that has 20 pages of differences between that and the main game then you are indeed not playing dungeons and dragons as written. One page of house rules is one thing but 20 someodd pages is a big distinction. If it comes off insulting thats your own guilt telling you it may be true.

Where's this 20 pages of new rules that the RPGA uses? I'm just curious if it's more "20 pages of rule clarifications" or "20 pages of rewriting the rules". I haven't followed RPGA stuff closely, but I recall seeing more rule clarifications and list of what's allowed and not than "we do grapple checks differently" kinds of rewriting of rules. To me that is a bigger distinction than raw number of pages.

Also, since you want to draw the line between them "not playing D&D" with 20 pages, and 1 page of house rules being ok - what's the cut off? If I have a 10 page document, is that still D&D? 8 pages? If I allow core rules only and no Complete X or other expansions, what then? Or for kicks, we play all expansions and no core class/races, is that D&D? If I still play 3.0 or 2nd edition or older, which has a heck of a lot more than 20 pages of changes, am I still playing D&D?

I have never played in the RPGA, so I don't think I have any "guilt telling that me its true" here, and your comments still seem to me to be pretty insulting. It looks to me that you have a very narrow definition of "true D&D" that I have a hard time seeing stand up to any scrutiny. Besides even if your definition can hold water, I'm glad WotC has a more open definition and are willing to playtest the new rules with a variety of gamers, environments, and play styles. D&D is supposed to support them all - at least in my opinion of "true D&D".

 

[Dacileva]

If you play in a system that has 20 pages of differences between that and the main game then you are indeed not playing dungeons and dragons as written. One page of house rules is one thing but 20 someodd pages is a big distinction. If it comes off insulting thats your own guilt telling you it may be true.

When I ran 2nd Edition AD&D, I had a forty-five page house rules document. I had made massive changes to several areas of the game. Was I not playing D&D anymore?

Oddly enough, when 3rd edition came out, I threw out that document completely. Why? Because many of my changes were included in 3rd edition as core rules. Therefore, since it's many of the same rules that I was using when I "wasn't playing D&D", 3rd edition must not be D&D, either.

Oops, anyone who uses any fluff material from any company other than WotC isn't playing D&D anymore! A 96-page supplement has lots of differences! Scarred Lands setting? Nope, not D&D! Too many changes! Hm, I'm going to include warlocks, since I like an at-will caster type, but the flavor of the warmage and wu jen don't fit my setting, so I won't include them. Oh noes! I'm not playing D&D anymore! (Hint: this kind of thing is the vast majority of what's in the RPGA's '20 pages of rules', items from supplements of wildly varying quality (Magic of Faerun, anyone?) that aren't available... so the more supplements, the inherently more pages of differences get created... let's see you run a game that includes sixty rulebooks and rules supplements with only one page of house rules and 'not allowed' items)

Maybe you should try to be a little more arrogant and patronizing. I think there are a few posters you haven't insulted.