Pathfinder 1E Things you Think WoTC should follow from Paizo

[JoeGKushner]

What does this even mean?

Does WotC need a shrine to EGG?

Probably vary tremendously on who you ask but...

Elimination of racial pantheons.

Elimination of Greyhawk (until proven wrong.)

Rewriting vast swathes of history (Io/Primordials,etc....)

Each campaign setting smashed into the model for 4e (Eberron handled this better than Forgotten Realms in my opinion)

Deliberation reduction of core monsters/classes/races in deliberate effort to sell future volumes.

Lack of multiple print adventures.

Lack of setting boxed sets.

Lack of printed campaign support.

etc... etc... etc...

(Note, not saying these are my issues with WoTC but that they are easily some of the things that I've seen crop up when discussing the 'history' of the game.)

 

[ProfessorCirno]

http://www.enworld.org/forum/news/254134-exclusive-interview-wizards-coast-president-greg-leeds.html

http://www.enworld.org/forum/genera...rview-wizards-coast-president-greg-leeds.html

If my memory is correct, that happened long after the initial announcement from Paizo and other websites.

WotC didn't say a word about it for a damningly long time - the websites themselves had to inform their customers. While WotC DID eventually talk about it, it wasn't until the giant mess was already deeply mired.

 

[JeffB]

Elimination of racial pantheons.

Elimination of Greyhawk (until proven wrong.)

Rewriting vast swathes of history (Io/Primordials,etc....)

Lack of printed campaign support.

Even as a massive fan of The Great Wheel, Greyhawk, Gary, D&D Setting/Game history, etc. the above quoted changes are things I ABSOLUTELY LOVE about 4E

I love the new spin, I love the fact that D&D is based again on a " Known World" style sparsely detailed setting with a pretty blank map, and some names. I love that so many things are not detailed or codified to death like they previously.

For once, in 30 years- there is no "yet another rehash of what has come before".

Not another same as the last version MOTP with new stats.
Not another butchering of GH
Not another trip down AD&D uni(con?)formity lane updated for new mechanics.

I realized with 3.5 I was sick of paying for the same material over and over again with each edition change. Hell even the 3rd parties started re-hashing their 3.0 products when 3.5 was announced. I've got 3 prior editions of the SOS material I can plug into 4E if I want. I'm glad WOTC had the stones to do something different instead of re-tread the same ground again! It may hae pissed off alot of people, but not this old grog.

And to be fair AD&D started the whole "shoehorning/campaign uniformity" thing- Gary made it quite clear at the time that OD&D was too wild and needed reigning in. 2E was even worse when it came to changing the setting to meet the rules-FRA was a joke, and 3E FR did this sort of thing as well- IOW it's nothing exclusive to the 4E crew @ WOTC.



And I'm not directing these comments at you personally Joe- just general convo

 

[JoeGKushner]

Certainly not a problem.

But your response is more along the lines of "I hate the old material and prefer the new way" as opposed to answering the specific question I covered no?

Even as a massive fan of The Great Wheel, Greyhawk, Gary, D&D Setting/Game history, etc. the above quoted changes are things I ABSOLUTELY LOVE about 4E

I love the new spin, I love the fact that D&D is based again on a " Known World" style sparsely detailed setting with a pretty blank map, and some names. I love that so many things are not detailed or codified to death like they previously.

For once, in 30 years- there is no "yet another rehash of what has come before".

Not another same as the last version MOTP with new stats.
Not another butchering of GH
Not another trip down AD&D uni(con?)formity lane updated for new mechanics.

I realized with 3.5 I was sick of paying for the same material over and over again with each edition change. Hell even the 3rd parties started re-hashing their 3.0 products when 3.5 was announced. I've got 3 prior editions of the SOS material I can plug into 4E if I want. I'm glad WOTC had the stones to do something different instead of re-tread the same ground again! It may hae pissed off alot of people, but not this old grog.

And to be fair AD&D started the whole "shoehorning/campaign uniformity" thing- Gary made it quite clear at the time that OD&D was too wild and needed reigning in. 2E was even worse when it came to changing the setting to meet the rules-FRA was a joke, and 3E FR did this sort of thing as well- IOW it's nothing exclusive to the 4E crew @ WOTC.



And I'm not directing these comments at you personally Joe- just general convo

 

[JeffB]

Certainly not a problem.

But your response is more along the lines of "I hate the old material and prefer the new way" as opposed to answering the specific question I covered no?

Nope, as I stated right up front, I am a BIG fan of all that material (AAMOF, somewhere I still even have my really beat up original gygax Great Wheel article from the late 70s I ripped out of TD or TSR) . Your list was saying "here are some areas where people feel WOTC has not adhered to the history of D&D and thats why people don't like 4E"

I'm simply stating that even as a huge fan of that history, I'm personally glad WOTC did something different this time (and to begin with I was supremely leery of all the changes). I can enjoy the old and the new- I don't need to hate on 4E or WOTC because they didnt re-hash the same thing they have for the last 3 editions and cannot understand why others would. Especially when the items I quoted from your post are mostly "fluff" issues that are easily put back into the game if someone wants. No-ones D&D game is going to fall apart because in 4E Goblins worship Bane instead of Malglibuyet(sp) or the Isle of Dread in 4E is a part of the feywild that appears here and there in the mortal realms. And if someones game DOES fall apart because of that kind of stuff, methinks edition differences are not the real problem

 

[JoeGKushner]

You can still enjoy 4e and dislike what WoTC has done with certain aspects.

For one instance, I've never liked the way Fey were handled in previous editions. Still not a huge fan but the new edition is much better in that regard.

Your example of the goblins is a good one. But take that to a campaign setting like say the new Forgotten Realms. It's not longer just a symbol swap but rather a plethora of 'fluff' changes.

Heck, there are probably people still mad at WoTC for the GLS and the end of print Dragon and Dungeon. (I prefer print as it seemed we got more material, especially say, Class Acts, even at a higher cost but like the DDI regular updates to the character builder so it's a wash for me.)

I just don't think when people are talking about the 'history' of the game that they want a 'shrine' to Gygax.

Nope, as I stated right up front, I am a BIG fan of all that material (AAMOF, somewhere I still even have my really beat up original gygax Great Wheel article from the late 70s I ripped out of TD or TSR) . Your list was saying "here are some areas where people feel WOTC has not adhered to the history of D&D and thats why people don't like 4E"

I'm simply stating that even as a huge fan of that history, I'm personally glad WOTC did something different this time (and to begin with I was supremely leery of all the changes). I can enjoy the old and the new- I don't need to hate on 4E or WOTC because they didnt re-hash the same thing they have for the last 3 editions and cannot understand why others would. Especially when the items I quoted from your post are mostly "fluff" issues that are easily put back into the game if someone wants. No-ones D&D game is going to fall apart because in 4E Goblins worship Bane instead of Malglibuyet(sp) or the Isle of Dread in 4E is a part of the feywild that appears here and there in the mortal realms. And if someones game DOES fall apart because of that kind of stuff, methinks edition differences are not the real problem

 

[catsclaw227]

Nope, as I stated right up front, I am a BIG fan of all that material (AAMOF, somewhere I still even have my really beat up original gygax Great Wheel article from the late 70s I ripped out of TD or TSR) . Your list was saying "here are some areas where people feel WOTC has not adhered to the history of D&D and thats why people don't like 4E"

I'm simply stating that even as a huge fan of that history, I'm personally glad WOTC did something different this time (and to begin with I was supremely leery of all the changes). I can enjoy the old and the new- I don't need to hate on 4E or WOTC because they didnt re-hash the same thing they have for the last 3 editions and cannot understand why others would. Especially when the items I quoted from your post are mostly "fluff" issues that are easily put back into the game if someone wants. No-ones D&D game is going to fall apart because in 4E Goblins worship Bane instead of Malglibuyet(sp) or the Isle of Dread in 4E is a part of the feywild that appears here and there in the mortal realms. And if someones game DOES fall apart because of that kind of stuff, methinks edition differences are not the real problem

You know what? This is me too. I was a fan of every edition I played. I have fond memories of all my D&D campaigns from OD&D, 1e AD&D, 2e, 3.xe, and now I am having the same experience with my 4e.

I like the new PoL lightly documenteted play it as it is campaign setting. I am running Scales of War right now and the players aren;t asking questions about what's far beyond the current story. ANd they don't feel dragged along, and are actually leading the action.

I love DMing!!! These guys, my players, make the best times...

 

[Peraion Graufalke]

If my memory is correct, that happened long after the initial announcement from Paizo and other websites.

That's correct. At least WotC did explain their actions (afterwards), and it was a PR disaster either way IMO.