Some of the 1E AD&D grognards I knew from that time period (ie. 1989-1990), were the people who thought 2E AD&D was purely a cash grab. They completely refused to participate in it under any circumstances, and stopped purchasing any new TSR products. The only TSR stuff they bought ever since, was mostly older 1E AD&D and BXCMI D&D modules they didn't have previously.
RSDancey replies to Goodman article (Forked Thread: Goodman rebuttal)
- Thread starter ggroy
- Start date
Some of the 1E AD&D grognards I knew from that time period (ie. 1989-1990), were the people who thought 2E AD&D was purely a cash grab. They completely refused to participate in it under any circumstances, and stopped purchasing any new TSR products. The only TSR stuff they bought ever since, was mostly older 1E AD&D and BXCMI D&D modules they didn't have previously.
Nobody who's read Complete Sh-sorry, Psionic, could argue that ;p
I think it's important to note that 3.5 was experimenting with new stuff near it's end. Incarnum, Tome of Battle...they were looking at new ways to present new mechanics. It's stuff like that which ensures an edition continues. We'll see how 4e fares with it's desire to not have new mechanics ever.
Also, I find it rather odd that there's this view where tabletop gaming and technology cannot co-exist. If anything, as technology regarding AR increases, I think we'll reach a point where tabletop suddenly becomes much bigger. AR technology could allow players to sit at a table and throw some die together...even if they're miles on top of miles away from one another.
Here is my theory. When you are learning something new -and especially when you are not learning in an academic fashion- when you get involved with a new subject, the interest you have been generating exaggerates the actual possibilities as you still fail to perceive the limits of the functionality and applicability of your subject in real life. The creative process of learning does not leave or open the space right away to your senses to perceive the normal or stable range of the reactions your subject of study brings in life.
His words are full of exaggeration. I am guessing he is being involved in some professional project that deals with what he is talking about and he is still in the phase of being overly impressed by the field he is now interacting and trying to work with.
It is true that video games occupy space in people's modern lives and modern economy. It is also true that computers occupy a space in modern science, production and the organization of the economy. This does not mean we will stop to need to consume or to want to consume material food. Or have sex. Or play physical games. Or go to excursions out in nature. Because the physical world IS our nature. Video games do exist for more than 30 years. The internet does exist for more than 15 years. MMOs exist for more than 10 years. With the explosive rise of new economies and markets such as China and Korea their market has seen an impressively explosive expansion indeed. But because of this the explosoveness of the MMO economy in the long run, it is not much more than a fad.
Moreover, if he is working professionaly indeed in the MMO sector he would rather praise his field. Because you know momentum and stuff are important to promote business.
Nevrtheless what Ryan stays tabletop entertainment is not going anywhere. And MMOs or whatever virtual technology gets developed is not going to suck up the generations of the future and have the humanity living in the matrix movie.
wedgeski
Adventurer
Well, I happen to think RyanD is right, but the time-scales he's talking about are probably outside the scope of any relevance they might have to me, a mid-30's gamer.
4E vs 3E vs 2E vs whatever, DDI, GSL, PDF's.. those subjects are so utterly, utterly inconsequential to the future of the game in even the medium term that discussions about them now are simply noise.
Perhaps the market is essentially frozen and can only get smaller. Perhaps we won't have the *time* for another generational peak before technology essentially overtakes us. The table-top will remain what it's always been, a niche I happen to love, and I will continue to pump money into the pot, as long as the product interests me. Perhaps in my lifetime (all being well), virtual worlds that encroach upon, and then eclipse, our own imaginations will start to emerge... and y'know, I kinda hope they do, because I'd sure as hell like to see that.
4E vs 3E vs 2E vs whatever, DDI, GSL, PDF's.. those subjects are so utterly, utterly inconsequential to the future of the game in even the medium term that discussions about them now are simply noise.
Perhaps the market is essentially frozen and can only get smaller. Perhaps we won't have the *time* for another generational peak before technology essentially overtakes us. The table-top will remain what it's always been, a niche I happen to love, and I will continue to pump money into the pot, as long as the product interests me. Perhaps in my lifetime (all being well), virtual worlds that encroach upon, and then eclipse, our own imaginations will start to emerge... and y'know, I kinda hope they do, because I'd sure as hell like to see that.
Kids aren't buying traditional comic books for a number of reasons. Also, they are buying English translations of Japanese manga. In significant quantities, if the shelf space devoted to them at chain book stores is any indication.
When adjusted for inflation, the core 4e gift set offered by Amazon cost less than the core AD&D books I began with back in the mid-1980s.
Has anybody from WotC mentioned that this was official policy for 4E?
If this turns out to be indeed official policy, then it wouldn't be too surprising to see 4E running a shorter commercial lifespan than 3E/3.5E's eight years. This is also considering the rate at which WotC has been pumping out new 4E books so far, though not quite at the same pace as new 3.5E books were being pumped out during mid-2004 to 2007. As a rough count, there were around 80 hardcover 3.5E WotC books published from mid-2003 to 2008 (including the core books, Expedition to ..., Forgotten Realms, and Eberron titles), and around 13 softcover modules.
For the WotC 2000-2003 period during 3E (before 3.5E), the rate of books pumped out is considerably less than the 3.5E period. As a rough count, there were around 31 splatbooks (including the core books) and 11 modules released for 3E by WotC from 2000 to mid-2003, of which almost half of the splatbooks were published as paperbacks books of less than 100 pages. (After 2002, just about every WotC splatbook was published exclusively as a hardcover book of 160 pages or greater).
The rate of new WotC D&D splatbooks being published during 3E was approximately one new book published per month, while during 3.5E it was appoximately two new books published per month (especially during the mid-2004 to 2007 period). Looking at 4E so far, the rate of WotC splatbooks being published is back to around one new hardcover splatbook published per month. (Arguably if one takes out all the 3.5E Forgotten Realms and Eberron books in the rough counts, then the rate of 3.5E books being released by WotC goes back down to approximately one new book published per month).
Mustrum_Ridcully
Legend
He might be thinking of how power works. There will probably not be an alternative "spellcasting system" à la Psionics vs Spontaneous Magic vs Vancian Magic vs Warlock Magic vs Binder Magic. But 3E didn't venture out off classes, skills or feats either.
But within this framework, they seem to be wiling to do a lot of innovation and explore the system possibilities.
The Barbarians Rage, and now the Monks Full Discipline and even the Vestige Warlock Option are innovations within the system, and they shape how you play these characters.
I think we'll see a lot more exploring in the future. They basically have no other choice if they want to fill their PHBs.
Kid Charlemagne
I am the Very Model of a Modern Moderator
Computer-Facilitated Tabletop Roleplaying, to coin a term? This is what I've been expecting as well. Laptops at the table are too cumbersome, but once smart phones become even more ubiquitous, it'll be plausible for everyone to show up at game with their iPhone and play. Heck, two of my players currently use their iPhones to roll their dice. Players who are not present or have moved away could play via webcam.
DM content creation tools would be huge, and the game could be fully virtual, partly virtual/partly face to face, or fully face to face.
Reading this post and some others makes me think that Wotc has failed strategically with D&D on the tabletop arena. It has failed to make a product that helps and inspires people to closely live fantastic adventures with their friends.
It has succeeded instead to produce a game, a functional game when running with the help of a computer that carries fascinating fantasy elements to artistically impress and please.
It still leaves the possibility of the freedom of a tabletop game in comparison to a computer game but fails in practice due to the time it needs when it runs.
To me, now, it is becoming more clear than ever that there is nothing that can be done to save the tabletop D&D if the next edition is nothing more than a game that plays in strict sessions (see combat) and not designed as an optimized product for a continuous dynamic of player interaction for the tabletop environment. As of today, I really find it ridiculous for a tabletop game to provoke questions about the use of skill challenges for roleplaying. Tabletop play is about thinking what you want to do and having the tool to do it. Not trying to play with a tool and see what you can do with it. This mentality exists in the realm of computers, not tabletop.
So it seems RDancey was right. The D&D as we want to think it today may only exist in the market as a hobby aking to railway-train modeling. If it wants to become a digital game it will not survive the competition because traditionally it is not made for this sort of thing, its philosophy is not that of a digital game. It will be a shame to see a tabletop game of a very strong brand name like D&D die because it somehow thinks it needs to be the most successful NeverwinterNights-like game and exhausts its efforts trying to achieve this goal.
Last edited:
wedgeski
Adventurer
You got that from my post?!
Don't mistake my jaded acceptance of the inevitable disappearance of tabletop RPG's with, well... anything you just said. I love 4E, it plays spectacularly well. It is enhanced by software elements, not ruled by them, and in my eyes, is an impressively designed piece of work. For almost a year, it most certainly *has* inspired fantastic adventures with friends, old and new, and will continue to do so for the forseeable future.
Eh? Fails in practice? You've lost me.
Similar Threads
- Locked
