WotC "dumbs-down" stuff? What's bad with it?

[Umbran]

There is an elitist attitude with gaming that seems to rather common no matter what the system being played is.

The implication that this attitude is inherent to anyone who doesn't like simplifying the rules seems to me to be a broad brush dipped in an ugly color. A great number of folks in RPGs like complex rules not due to elitism, but merely because they like playing with complex rules.

Let's say you liked the New York Times crossword puzzle. It is a hard one, especially by the end of the week. You'd react similarly if they decided to "make the puzzle more accessible" by using simpler and more common words. It would remove much of the reason you did the puzzle. For some folks, elitism may play a part. But for many, it is only because it actually makes the game less fun.

Different people like different things. There is a point at which making a game accessible removes elements that someone likes. There's no crime in being annoyed at that.

 

[Ranger REG]

I admire a man who knows that he belongs in with the barbarians and can admit it (JUST pulling your leg)

Here's the nature of my complaint: the "dumbed down" version has not improved the game in any way, but it has made the books unpalatable, boring, tasteless, bland, obnoxiously dull and otherwise uninteresting. So do permit this grognard to "grogne" a bit (since it means growling or grumbling discontent).

Let alone the fact that the dumbing down has resulted in inflationary volumes of overly large text spreading ever more onto more and more discombobulated pages. In essence, the wizardlings have wrought naught but a mess. Who, then, shall set this matter aright by publishing a consolidated this, and a fully compended that?

I didn't notice rules have to be enjoyable to read as A Song of Ice and Fire. :\

 

[Psion]

Almost every grognard I've ever seen has complained that 3E is too complicated, bloated and slow.

Do you plan to go to GenCon this year? Because I could to rectify this.

With a single exception, everyone who played with me in my old 1e group has moved on to 3e. And not looked back.

Surveys of this forum (the premier 3e fansite) regularly reveals that most of the forumites have been playing since 1e. I suspect your observation may be a factor of grognards you know.

 

[Bad Paper]

New statblock: this is great. I love it. It's intuitive. It's even better than my personal statblock I designed a couple years ago.

2-1-0 Power-Attack rule, for the math-retarded: this is terrible. Someone above said it: they sacrificed balance for simplicity, damaging playability anyway.

New adventure format: I'm mixed on this one. This could be OK, or it could turn into a big ball of suck. I feel like this could eventually turn into 5x7 or 6x9 booklets, for keeping the one-page-per-encounter format, but making up for dearth of content.

At any rate, it is pretty clear that WotC has gotten the message from Hasbro on High: make your product accessible or get the hell out of the biz. Hasbro isn't exactly famous for catering to grognards.

 

[Psion]

2-1-0 Power-Attack rule, for the math-retarded: this is terrible. Someone above said it: they sacrificed balance for simplicity, damaging playability anyway.

Agree.

 

[Ipissimus]

To reiterate some points that have already been said here: Simplicity of rules is good. Simplicity while keeping options good.

Simplicity of adventures, however, is bad.

'Dumbing down' adventures annoys me, the way dumbing down movies annoys me. I understand why they do it, so that it appeals to a wider audience, but it's annoying all the same. I've read plenty of adventures that were, frankly, ruined by it.

Int 33 Wizards NOT talking any precautions to warn themselves of an enemy's advance through their living quarters (Maure Castle). Solars who, with their supreme wisdom and intelligence, who can't formulate a decent philosophical argument in the favor of forces of good or work around the strictures of a geas for the greater good (Bastion of Broken Souls).

This may be great if you're DMing 12 year olds but adults need more meat to their adventures, better developed characters and harder challenges. Getting anything less than that kills the player's suspension of disbelief.

 

[WayneLigon]

Almost every grognard I've ever seen has complained that 3E is too complicated, bloated and slow.

Good. Really, it's time to just take the old farts, stick them in a corner and let them sourly chew at their own bellies until they expire.

I am convinced that one big stumbling block to RPGs is that so many games are run so badly, and usually not through the fault of the GM. Some are total idiots, yes, but a lot of them simply haven't been trained to be better. They could be better, but they require a little more friendly hand-holding than you usually find in an RPG.

Now normally I assume that no-one, ever, really learns an RPG by picking up the game unheard-of and taking it home to puzzle it out. Not in 30 years of gaming have I ever encountered anyone doing that, save anecdotaly on these boards. The people that train them should be putting them on the right path... but so often it's not the case. They learn from bad GMs and bad players, and think that D&D is always like that.. and walk away from the hobby. Or they fumble being a GM so badly they drive others away and eventually give it up themselves. All because so many times, most RPGs are terrible at telling people how to run one.

If the simpler math, stat blocks, and expanded explanations give some people the training wheels they need to stay in the hobby, good.

 

[Ranger REG]

D&D has always been a pretty bad system for simulation, beyond broad strokes.

It's not intend to. Much like Snakes on a Plane is not intend to be a good horror film (it still deserves a Razzie nom).

 

[Korgoth]

Simplicity of adventures, however, is bad.

'Dumbing down' adventures annoys me, the way dumbing down movies annoys me. I understand why they do it, so that it appeals to a wider audience, but it's annoying all the same. I've read plenty of adventures that were, frankly, ruined by it.

I understand that this happened with the remake of Ravenloft: a bunch of non-combat encounters (one might call them "role-playing") were turned into combat encounters. I heard about 3 that stand out as glaring.

Good. Really, it's time to just take the old farts, stick them in a corner and let them sourly chew at their own bellies until they expire.

Yes, it makes perfect sense to marginalize and ignore the people who remember when and why D&D was an actually great game. That way the increasingly dwindling numbers of tabletop RP'ers can peacefully buy D&D 4.8374E in four years and wonder why everybody is quitting to go play World of BoreCraft.

Meanwhile, I'll be 'sourly' enjoying a game of D&D that is consonant with the original intentions and design goals of the game.

Note: I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with genuinely enjoying 3E. If you're enjoying it, that's great. I gave it a very fair shake and found that it tends, due to its structure, to drain the fun out of the game. And fun is what the game has to deliver to keep people playing. 3E was a great experiment that failed, and all the problems constantly being hashed out here about balance, simplicity, bloat, power creep, screwy PrCs, endless errata, etc. are a direct result of 3E's design philosophy and approach.

 

[hong]

Yes, it makes perfect sense to marginalize and ignore the people who remember when and why D&D was an actually great game.

Oh well.