Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
So it's finally happened? D&D reduced to board games...
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ppaladin123" data-source="post: 5466920" data-attributes="member: 60923"><p>1. I love card and board games. There is nothing to this claim that board games represent the dumbing down of a hobby. Have you played any of the Warhammer board games? How about any of the wave of German board games that have come out over the last 15 years? These are complex and interesting and fun. Importantly, they can be played in 30 minute to 3 hour blocks, don't require much prep time, and don't require any sort of player continuity over sessions. They scratch a different itch than a d&d campaign or serve as a substitute for people who can't run/play in d&d games regularly.</p><p></p><p>2. I like WoW. There is nothing wrong with liking WoW. I don't understand the need to use WoW as an invective. It is a silly, self-defeating proclivity of "nerds" to scorn those who have other, equally "nerdy" hobbies. Star Trek fans bash Star Wars. Tabletop role players look down on LARPers. Video game enthusiasts look down on board game enthusiasts. War gamers look down on role players. Whatever. We have so much in common yet we squabble like sectarians. How about a unified front?</p><p></p><p>3. It isn't even a good argument to claim d&d has become just like WoW since the advent of 4e. Roles are pretty much the only thing that 4e in particular has in common with WoW and those were present in MMOs before WoW. Pretty much every other similarity is the result of WoW consciously drawing on previous versions of D&D for class abilities and styles. Furthermore, asking what a class (or adventurer) contributes to an adventuring party is quite reasonable. Clerics were always, "leaders," even if we hadn't articulated the category yet. Likewise, rogues were always, "strikers." A lot of other classes had more ambiguous purpose. The people behind 4e set about to make sure that each class had something to add in combat and that that class could not render the rest of the party redundant. Then they gave each contribution type an easy to understand label. It is certainly reasonable to debate whether classes should be nested within roles (as in early 4e) or vice versa (as in the essentials line).That is a different topic though.</p><p></p><p>4. I am sorry you don't like the direction d&d is headed (I have worries as well) but it is not right to argue that those who work at WotC are therefore motivated by nothing but destructive greed. Some of the developers/designers post here. They are good guys and they clearly love this game. You have to love gaming to work in the gaming industry; it is not glamorous or high paying and there is very high turn-over. You might not like what they created but don't impugn their motives.</p><p></p><p>5. That said, the search for profit is always going to be part of the gaming industry. We'd all love it if we had designer slaves working in our basements to construct gaming systems to our idiosyncratic specifications. I'd love it if out of sheer joy and magnanimity Mike Mearls came to my house one day to construct D&D the ppaladin123 edition. But gaming companies need to pay printers and artists and game designers, and these people need food, clothing and shelter. Less profit means less money for releases, less money to hire talent, fewer maps, few pictures, less support. The market for tabletop rpgs isn't particularly large. WotC needs to capture as much of that market as it can and do what it can to expand the market as well. That means creating things they believe most gamers will like (even if you in particular don't like them). In that regard 4e may have been a miscalculation; I don't have data to assess that claim. Even if you dislike the 4e ruleset, you should root for its success. Anything that grows the base of gamers is a good thing. Anything that helps keep the term, "dungeons and dragons" fresh in public consciousness is a good thing. </p><p></p><p>6. Luckily even in this tiny market there is some room for niche games/systems. You may not be able to find a system that is exactly to your liking but I bet you can find something that you can house rule into acceptability. You want a game built purely out of love? Build it using the enormous selection of parts with which you have been provided.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ppaladin123, post: 5466920, member: 60923"] 1. I love card and board games. There is nothing to this claim that board games represent the dumbing down of a hobby. Have you played any of the Warhammer board games? How about any of the wave of German board games that have come out over the last 15 years? These are complex and interesting and fun. Importantly, they can be played in 30 minute to 3 hour blocks, don't require much prep time, and don't require any sort of player continuity over sessions. They scratch a different itch than a d&d campaign or serve as a substitute for people who can't run/play in d&d games regularly. 2. I like WoW. There is nothing wrong with liking WoW. I don't understand the need to use WoW as an invective. It is a silly, self-defeating proclivity of "nerds" to scorn those who have other, equally "nerdy" hobbies. Star Trek fans bash Star Wars. Tabletop role players look down on LARPers. Video game enthusiasts look down on board game enthusiasts. War gamers look down on role players. Whatever. We have so much in common yet we squabble like sectarians. How about a unified front? 3. It isn't even a good argument to claim d&d has become just like WoW since the advent of 4e. Roles are pretty much the only thing that 4e in particular has in common with WoW and those were present in MMOs before WoW. Pretty much every other similarity is the result of WoW consciously drawing on previous versions of D&D for class abilities and styles. Furthermore, asking what a class (or adventurer) contributes to an adventuring party is quite reasonable. Clerics were always, "leaders," even if we hadn't articulated the category yet. Likewise, rogues were always, "strikers." A lot of other classes had more ambiguous purpose. The people behind 4e set about to make sure that each class had something to add in combat and that that class could not render the rest of the party redundant. Then they gave each contribution type an easy to understand label. It is certainly reasonable to debate whether classes should be nested within roles (as in early 4e) or vice versa (as in the essentials line).That is a different topic though. 4. I am sorry you don't like the direction d&d is headed (I have worries as well) but it is not right to argue that those who work at WotC are therefore motivated by nothing but destructive greed. Some of the developers/designers post here. They are good guys and they clearly love this game. You have to love gaming to work in the gaming industry; it is not glamorous or high paying and there is very high turn-over. You might not like what they created but don't impugn their motives. 5. That said, the search for profit is always going to be part of the gaming industry. We'd all love it if we had designer slaves working in our basements to construct gaming systems to our idiosyncratic specifications. I'd love it if out of sheer joy and magnanimity Mike Mearls came to my house one day to construct D&D the ppaladin123 edition. But gaming companies need to pay printers and artists and game designers, and these people need food, clothing and shelter. Less profit means less money for releases, less money to hire talent, fewer maps, few pictures, less support. The market for tabletop rpgs isn't particularly large. WotC needs to capture as much of that market as it can and do what it can to expand the market as well. That means creating things they believe most gamers will like (even if you in particular don't like them). In that regard 4e may have been a miscalculation; I don't have data to assess that claim. Even if you dislike the 4e ruleset, you should root for its success. Anything that grows the base of gamers is a good thing. Anything that helps keep the term, "dungeons and dragons" fresh in public consciousness is a good thing. 6. Luckily even in this tiny market there is some room for niche games/systems. You may not be able to find a system that is exactly to your liking but I bet you can find something that you can house rule into acceptability. You want a game built purely out of love? Build it using the enormous selection of parts with which you have been provided. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
So it's finally happened? D&D reduced to board games...
Top