Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cbas_10" data-source="post: 3822380" data-attributes="member: 55767">Little things don't bug me and can be worked around.  Druids, warlocks, cosmology, tieflings, and such are really not a BIG deal.  A few things, however, are a big deal to me.  Many things have already been mentioned here, but this is, of course, my list.--The lack of emphasis that this is a Role-playing game.  Computer RPGs are not really role playing games; they are electronic substitutes that end up as Adventure Games.  Computer RPGs are not BAD - I love playing my Neverwinter Nights, Elder Scrolls, and such.  However, it is absolutely clear that there is an amount of borrowing from Computer RPGs (and possibly even MMORPGS) for this tabletop game.  Even social interactions are said to be somehow "statted out as encounters"....Huh?  It is possible that this particular dislike is totally unfounded and that there is truly a place for great role-playing of enriched characters in 4E.  If so, Why are they not talking about it....since D&D is a ROLE-playing game?--Labels, roles (this better not be what they mean when they still call D&D a role-playing game) for critters and players, and a theme of every idea having its planned-out spot for how it works within the game.  Leaders come in many forms, as do sneaky types, brutes/tanks, controllers (wtf?), and any other archetype we can think of.  I want the ability to take an Orc and its stats...and apply it to my game how I want to: there will be a tyrant of a leader, an elder shaman/priest/mystic type, scouts, troops, and then there will be many unique orcs.  One will be the head of the scouts, perfectly represented as having a few levels of Scout and Rogue.  One will be the head of a group that fits with my "Alliance with clerics of Hextor" storyline: a Marshall/Blackguard who seeks to overthrow the current orc leader.  I know I can use any set of stats for the latter example and run a story like I want....but have I lost the Freedom to make such intricate characters if I wanted to?  The ability to customize and write up monsters as detailed as I could with PCs was THE big selling point that hooked me into 3E.  Generic monsters are .... boring.  Using multiple pages to write up brute, controller, and whatever other variants - instead of simply giving Orc stats and a page of flavorful discussion regarding common classes, organizations, and ideas - well...that's simply boring and a waste of page count.--Points of Light.  The idea on its own is actually a good idea.  I can understand a little bit of why they are doing it.  However, as a player who has X-amount of time for crafting my game (creating monsters & NPCs is a small fraction of the effort, compared to creating the stories, maps, NPC personalities, and locations), I really like having a specific setting sourcebook.  It gives me a foundation with which to base my many NPCs and plot ideas from.  Sure, I can create a bunch of NPCs from nothing...and generate plot seeds from those NPCs.  However, I like having that setting sourcebook so that the NPCs (and PCs) seem connected to something....so that everything seems more organic.  The BEST example of what I want (and what I may use in the future) is the old Kingdoms of Kalamar.  It was the first hardcover book Kenzer did for 3E (adapted from one of their old boxed sets).  The book had no game stats, NPC classes, or anything that directly tied it to being used for D&D.  It was simply a setting with rich histories and interesting personalities.  I'd imagine there would have to be a comprimise and include a few crunchy bits for 4E....but you get my point.--The killing off of Dungeon and Dragon magazines for the sake of fueling the DDI.  I will go on record and risk my reputation (ok, that means a lot more in my group and at my game store <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> ) by saying that Hasbro/WotC has vastly over-estimated how many gamers will use the DDI and conduct games over the internet.  Too many eggs have been put into this basket, and they are assuming that every D&D gamer will want to incorporate the electronic content in thier games to one degree or another.  I loved downloading maps from the Map-a-week section, and I used to like the web enhancements when they were truly extra bits of content that could not fit into the book.  On rare occasion, I found a worthwhile article to read.  However, whether it is trying to mess with the digital desktop or read a pdf rulebook....I really don't like mixing a computer with game sessions.  No, I'm not some old bastard that hates technology.  During my games, I am up and about...walking and talking and expressing my points (in-character stuff and grand descriptions)...during combat descriptions, i quickly jot notes on any scrap of paper while i describe the events as the dice roll out.  I am NOT about to slow myself down and change the actual way I play...for some digital initiative.  I know we all have a choice whether to use it or not, but what I am really disappointed with is the fact that Piazo and the fans were not given that choice regarding magazines that were still pretty successful.  Heck...I'd happily use it and pay the subscription fee if the people at Piazo were still running things.  Those guys and gals knew gaming!I hope I am wrong about some or all of these points.  I like D&D, am not stuck on 3E just because it is 3E, and I would happily buy more books.  Potentially new players and more reading material is all good to me.  However, 4E has a few too many MAJOR strikes against them so far.</blockquote>

Verification