What is the essence of D&D

[Garthanos]

Very very loosely based on one individual.

Moses miracles ... maces to avoid spilling blood.... yes there was no explicit you are a celibate... there was also no this is the Xtian crusaders eithers we are pretty much talking a response to the flavor. The bible was that explicitly mentioned no? It really didnt have to be for the flavor to carry with the style of magic they performed.

I was characterizing the flavor of the class not saying the class inhibited roleplaying with explicit hard coded restrictions.

 

[Garthanos]

I can't get behind Rogues being able to do this stuff to nearly the same extent, though. Doesn't fit.

The 4e rogue was if you chose the right abilities very much the Ninja... the class is flexible based on choices.

 

[Garthanos]

Although as far as hard coded restrictions go in 1e days when I asked a DM if I could have a Cleric be a priest of Odin with a spear.. the blunt weapon requirement was enforced so yeah it did kind of hard code things that could have been roleplay choices.

 

[Lanefan]

See, you're conflating the economics end of things with perception. I mean, 3e tanked as well, remember. There's a reason we got 3.5 a year early and then 4e not that long after that. 3e is hardly a stellar success.

Au contraire. If anything, 3e was too successful in its first couple of years; thereby setting impossible financial expectations for subsequent years from suits who don't know how the release-boom-and-tail-off cycle works.

 

[Zardnaar]

Although as far as hard coded restrictions go in 1e days when I asked a DM if I could have a Cleric be a priest of Odin with a spear.. the blunt weapon requirement was enforced so yeah it did kind of hard code things that could have been roleplay choices.

So? It's what it was a bit absurd true.

 

[Garthanos]

So? It's what it was a bit absurd true.

So absurdity and nailed down flavor that restricted roleplay gets mocked oh my... end of the world

 

[Zardnaar]

Au contraire. If anything, 3e was too successful in its first couple of years; thereby setting impossible financial expectations for subsequent years from suits who don't know how the release-boom-and-tail-off cycle works.

3E did well but they pulled the plug to soon and 3.5 didn't do that well.

3.0 was horribly front loaded year 1. Sales were decking but even if they declined 50% the edition probably would have clocked in below 1E and BECMI.

 

[Zardnaar]

So absurdity and nailed down flavor that restricted roleplay gets mocked oh my... end of the world

It was a roleplay restriction, not a wtf how does this work.

Note editions with that restriction are the biggest selling D&D's of all time.

Mechanics don't really matter unless they are so outlandish they alienate the casuals.

In 4Es case it wasn't really the outlandish mechanics so much more they just sucked the fun out of the game for most players.

Tactical skirmish game won't have wife appeal.

 

[Garthanos]

The d20 OGL made the entire 3.x pervasive ... when did the WWW kick in during this timeline?

 

[Lanefan]

They didnt even have support for non-judeo christian style clerics until those specialty priests came out...

Actually yes they did even as far back as 1978, if you looked at Druids (a sub-class of Cleric anyway) as actually being Nature Clerics. Very Pagan.

And, non-Human pantheons (and thus non-Human and certainly non-Christian Clerics) have also been around for-nearly-ever in the game.