|
I'll be compiling the 'Greatest Hits' from the last two threads here throughout the day, but sufficed to say: D&D Next is now more freakshow than game. There's a bizarre parabola where I was excited, then angry, then horrified, then disenthused, and now my interest is arcing back up as it becomes an absolutely insane shitshow. If you wanted to make a good game in 2012, you would be hard pressed to beat this methodology:quote:-What is D&D Next doing? Masochists can join the D&D Next Group on WotC's site. The only high point is that Happylef posts there.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 16:44 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2013 23:59 |
|
|
Does anyone have any opinions on what their IRL Intelligence score might be, or any insights into the practical use of medieval weapons in a combat setting?
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 17:13 |
|
|
If this THREAD could avoid becoming the spectacular shitshow that the last one was that would be welcome. In fact given how these things go if anyone wants to start a more serious business 5E thread that is less Grogs.txt Jr. it may take some of the pressure on that account off. I'd keep both of them, just one would be the sideshow and one the srs bizzness game discussion.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 17:22 |
|
|
Has there been any more word about WotC rereleasing older D&D books? I have some friends who are looking to replace some books with bad bindings and they don't want to gamble on eBay auctions.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 17:24 |
|
|
I thought the Ranger and Paladin class concept blogs were very telling. I'd pull up the links myself, but 
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 18:39 |
|
|
In semi-related news, WotC has announced they are cancelling their Virtual Tabletop beta program and it will never be released. They're scrapping it all together. In oddly timed news, Paizo is developing their own Virtual Table Top program, and to take it a step further, they are going to develop their excellent AP library for the VTT play. While not directly 5E related, to me this represents a style of thinking/development between the two companies and why Paizo is starting to outpace WotC in the market. I've always said there was a market for Adventure Paths and by having a robust team that could develop content D&D wouldn't have to flood the market with builder books that just bloat the rules. It's what happened with 3rd edition, 3.5, and now 4E, and it's the most likely scenario for Next. http://www.enworld.org/forum/news/3...-cancelled.html http://www.enworld.org/forum/news/3...game-space.html
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 20:14 |
|
|
Korlac posted:
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 20:35 |
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:Honestly I find that Adventure Paths are far more bloating and flood the market more so than what Wizards did with 4th edition. Yet builder books, or "splat" books do bloat the rules set and make character creation more complicated and unapproachable to newer players. They tend to also introduce new rules and mechanics that also make it difficult for the GM to keep up with the system. Honestly, if I were running the D&D product line I'd release an official Adventure Path for each campaign book that came out. Meaning, when Eberron released it would have an adventure path to take characters from level 1 to 30 specifically within the world of Eberron and would highlight features of that campaign world. I thought WotC was going to do this with Neverwinter, and they hinted at a campaign for the crown, but it never happened. There was a decent amount of hype around Neverwinter that didn't result in anything.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 20:47 |
|
|
Korlac posted:Adventure Paths are isolated products that you don't NEED to be familiar with or to consume.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 20:48 |
|
|
Korlac posted:While not directly 5E related, to me this represents a style of thinking/development between the two companies and why Paizo is starting to outpace WotC in the market. I think this is simply because as lovely as Paizo can be they at least have direction and a definite plan and a single audience. They know what they're doing and who they're making it for, where as, at least as far as D&DN, WotC is overstretched and scatterbrained.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 20:50 |
|
|
Winson_Paine posted:If this THREAD could avoid becoming the spectacular shitshow that the last one was that would be welcome. In fact given how these things go if anyone wants to start a more serious business 5E thread that is less Grogs.txt Jr. Wait... what behavior are you asking us to avoid? We kind of have to quote, then talk about, the things 5E's designers say, don't we?
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 20:53 |
|
|
Still looking forward to this with hopeful optimism. Curious to see how the different modules they release mix and match with each other; you could potentially run an entirely different system between two games. It's going to be interesting for sure.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 20:54 |
|
|
ZenMasterBullshit posted:I think this is simply because as lovely as Paizo can be they at least have direction and a definite plan and a single audience. They know what they're doing and who they're making it for, where as, at least as far as D&DN, WotC is overstretched and scatterbrained.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 20:55 |
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:Its also not true that they are outpacing WoTC in all areas. Paizo's miniature business plan was one that WoTC abandoned years ago. WoTC retooled it to be a fairly cool idea to appeal to a larger audience. Oh, I didn't figure they were at all. I meant more that "If they are/if they start to" I can understand why. I guess I should have made that point more clear.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 20:59 |
|
|
Ferrinus posted:Wait... what behavior are you asking us to avoid? We kind of have to quote, then talk about, the things 5E's designers say, don't we? The above tangent about Paizo would be a start, as would that horrorshow of a FATE derail in the previous thread. Basically if y'all want to rag on 5E I have no dog in that fight but avoid turning it int grogs.txt jr. or the "your game sux superbrawl." If you want to have a WOTC thread where people talk about reprints or a STATE OF THE INDUSTRY thread where people bitch about Paizo flooding the market with Adventure Paths that is swell, I encourage those to be posted. They would likely be interesting. But in as much as 5E is a big deal on the horizon keeping the 5e thread about 5e is the goal here.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 21:05 |
|
|
Dragging this from the last thread.Korlac posted:"Rolling several encounters worth of monsters into one just means that the battle will just last longer, no other effects, no sir"
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 21:07 |
|
|
3E CR math does not work out pretty well.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 21:11 |
|
|
Ferrinus posted:3E CR math does not work out pretty well. 
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 21:13 |
|
|
Winson_Paine posted:The above tangent about Paizo would be a start, as would that horrorshow of a FATE derail in the previous thread. Basically if y'all want to rag on 5E I have no dog in that fight but avoid turning it int grogs.txt jr. or the "your game sux superbrawl." If you want to have a WOTC thread where people talk about reprints or a STATE OF THE INDUSTRY thread where people bitch about Paizo flooding the market with Adventure Paths that is swell, I encourage those to be posted. They would likely be interesting. But in as much as 5E is a big deal on the horizon keeping the 5e thread about 5e is the goal here. So are you making a bold proclamation to never, ever talk about anything other than the upcoming edition, up to and including acknowledging that there is an industry that has other products?
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 21:15 |
|
|
Gerund posted:So are you making a bold proclamation to never, ever talk about anything other than the upcoming edition, up to and including acknowledging that there is an industry that has other products? It works for the 5e design/PR team.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 21:16 |
|
|
Winson_Paine posted:The above tangent about Paizo would be a start, as would that horrorshow of a FATE derail in the previous thread.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 21:17 |
|
|
As much as I hate derails too (like the Batman vs. Superman one from the last thread, or the Potterchat in the first), it's impossible to not discuss Paizo when talking about DnD Next. [edit] Gobbeldygook posted:Dragging this from the last thread. (that was actually me you quoted, not Korlac) No, it's never that simple. Adding more monsters means that it will be difficult to keep them from ganging up on the glass cannons. Adding harder monsters means that their attacks will deal significantly more damage per round than usual. The action economy means that each player will still get one attack per round, while the damage they take will be much more significant. Even if they use each action to expend a daily resource, there is no guarantee that they will manage to get them all out before the TPK. The only way a big encounter with an entire day's worth of XP can work would be if the GM sends the enemies in waves, effectively making it separate encounters considering that there are no encounter resources to replenish. But then again I don't know how anyone would honestly post about 3E CR math in any positive light, so you are probably joking.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 21:21 |
|
|
Gerund posted:So are you making a bold proclamation to never, ever talk about anything other than the upcoming edition, up to and including acknowledging that there is an industry that has other products? I am saying this is not the general chat thread, yes. Use your best judgement. MadScientistWorking posted:A lot of the time they start writing blogs it seems like some poorly implemented variant of a completely different game. It was on topic right until the point it became a multipage report generating brawl over if Catastropost understood the true meaning of FATE or not, yes. Rexides posted:As much as I hate derails too (like the Batman vs. Superman one from the last thread, or the Potterchat in the first), it's impossible to not discuss Paizo when talking about DnD Next. Then offer some context at least. If Paizo is somehow forcing WOTC's hand or whatever, say that.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 21:24 |
|
|
ZenMasterBullshit posted:I think this is simply because as lovely as Paizo can be they at least have direction and a definite plan and a single audience. They know what they're doing and who they're making it for, where as, at least as far as D&DN, WotC is overstretched and scatterbrained. They're demonstrating how ineffective it is to pander to your customer rather than dishing up something they will want. Anyone that has any business sense is aware of this. That being said if WotC was as good at making games as they were running off talent we wouldn't even have this thread.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 21:27 |
|
|
Gobbeldygook posted:Dragging this from the last thread. Sorry, that was Rexides who posted that, not me.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 21:28 |
|
|
Solvarn posted:That being said if WotC was as good at making games as they were running off talent we wouldn't even have this thread.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 21:31 |
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:They are actually good at making games. RPGs on the other hand are an entirely different story. 
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 21:34 |
|
|
FactsAreUseless posted:They make a great MMO.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 21:38 |
|
|
Winson_Paine posted:The above tangent about Paizo would be a start, as would that horrorshow of a FATE derail in the previous thread. Basically if y'all want to rag on 5E I have no dog in that fight but avoid turning it int grogs.txt jr. or the "your game sux superbrawl." If you want to have a WOTC thread where people talk about reprints or a STATE OF THE INDUSTRY thread where people bitch about Paizo flooding the market with Adventure Paths that is swell, I encourage those to be posted. They would likely be interesting. But in as much as 5E is a big deal on the horizon keeping the 5e thread about 5e is the goal here. In the history of WotC I have seen that they handle their Intellectual Property in such a way that it causes its own early demise. This is prediction for 5E, not from a rules or content quality standpoint, but from a marketing strategy position. If they don't have a plan to release playable content for this new edition in such a way to keep people hooked, then this edition will be tossed aside even faster than 4E was. Their marketing strategy has go beyond core books, builder books, and campaign books. They need to give a reason for players to keep coming back over and over again beyond the rules. And if the rules are bad (I'm not saying they are for 5E, but I've thus far been unimpressed) then this will hasten the demise of this edition.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 21:39 |
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:I wasn't actually criticizing 4th edition when I wrote that. The board games generally seemed to be far more well received and better developed than their RPGs.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 21:40 |
|
|
Korlac posted:I apologize, it was not my intent to derail the thread. Let me see if I can bring this into a more coherent discussion. If the rules are good- like a well-tuned boardgame- why would you care that their isn't a new book's worth of content coming out each month? RPGs aren't like comic books; they don't need a new issue to make people feel that they are 'part of the story'. They aren't at all intellectual property- they're technology and design with a veneer of story on top.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 21:43 |
|
|
Korlac posted:I apologize, it was not my intent to derail the thread. Let me see if I can bring this into a more coherent discussion. You are swell, and in the interests of acting in good faith I will toss my own bit in - do you think this is a legacy of TSR? They kept beating the flanks of the horse until it collapsed (for a whole bunch of reasons, but hundreds of thirty two page supplements published in a near constant stream was pretty terrible). 3rd did that for a long time as well; and 4th almost sort of set itself up for that because given the power structure there is only so much they could publish before the material started to sort of cycle around on itself. Given the WOTC dislike of publishing modules and the like, I don't know what else they would do. Paizo seems to be on to something with the above adventure paths, but I suspect even that is a finite thing. I guess past a certain point you just have enough books for a given thing. I wonder if the MODULAR thing will combat that; given some of the claims drat near any nonsense they choose to cram in could be a module. I imagine they could keep that going for awhile although the end result will look like a patchwork freakshow of a game. (Plus, you have a rad avatar.)
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 21:46 |
|
|
Gerund posted:If the rules are good- like a well-tuned boardgame- why would you care that their isn't a new book's worth of content coming out each month?
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 21:49 |
|
|
FactsAreUseless posted:I assumed you were talking about their non-D&D properties, but the D&D 4e board games are really good, too. They're a pretty good model for how to make a "stripped down" D&D and still have it be interesting. quote:The difference being here that board games come with the content as part of the package. To make it applicable in this scenario, would you buy a board game that just had the rules book but didn't have the board needed to play on?
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 21:57 |
|
|
Winson_Paine posted:You are swell, and in the interests of acting in good faith I will toss my own bit in - do you think this is a legacy of TSR? They kept beating the flanks of the horse until it collapsed (for a whole bunch of reasons, but hundreds of thirty two page supplements published in a near constant stream was pretty terrible). 3rd did that for a long time as well; and 4th almost sort of set itself up for that because given the power structure there is only so much they could publish before the material started to sort of cycle around on itself. Given the WOTC dislike of publishing modules and the like, I don't know what else they would do. Paizo seems to be on to something with the above adventure paths, but I suspect even that is a finite thing. Thanks avatar bro!   In answer to your question, no, I don't believe this is a TSR legacy problem. If you think of all the memorable campaign books, they're all from 2nd edition or the original. Temple of Elemental Evil, Castle Ravenloft, Tomb of Horrors, etc... Back in the day TSR did release quality adventures that left a lasting impact on players, so much so that these modules get remade for each new edition. With that in mind, are there any "classic" modules/adventures from 3.0/3.5/4E that you can remember? For my 2 cents, the only one that's memorable is Scales of War, and that's because it's the only full fledged adventure path for 4E (which I'm currently running as a modified A-Team themed campaign in PBP). Other than that, the memorable 3.0/3.5 modules were from the RPGA and were developed by the community, not WotC. In this regards they're failing their own IP and losing money in the process. Paizo is selling a collectors edition of their first AP for 200 bucks, and people are throwing money at them for it. So obviously there's money to be made there.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 22:05 |
|
|
Korlac posted:
EDIT: Thanks for reminding me. quote:With that in mind, are there any "classic" modules/adventures from 3.0/3.5/4E that you can remember? For my 2 cents, the only one that's memorable is Scales of War, and that's because it's the only full fledged adventure path for 4E (which I'm currently running as a modified A-Team themed campaign in PBP). Other than that, the memorable 3.0/3.5 modules were from the RPGA and were developed by the community, not WotC. quote:In answer to your question, no, I don't believe this is a TSR legacy problem. If you think of all the memorable campaign books, they're all from 2nd edition or the original. Temple of Elemental Evil, Castle Ravenloft, Tomb of Horrors, etc...
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 22:21 |
|
|
Korlac posted:The difference being here that board games come with the content as part of the package. To make it applicable in this scenario, would you buy a board game that just had the rules book but didn't have the board needed to play on? Are you saying that RPGs have no content?
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 22:33 |
|
|
Gerund posted:Are you saying that RPGs have no content? The system is still reliant on the DM producing the content, which is fine, I don't have a problem with that. What I'm saying is that WotC causes they're own product to bloat and become unwieldy because they only focus on the mechanics side of the equation and don't pay much attention to the content side. By releasing nothing but builder books and campaign guides, each with new powers, feats, rituals, spells, etc..., the overall mechanics swell extremely fast. Now, if they were instead to stagger the release, add in adventures as an official part of their product line (and not the stand alone stuff) that is fully integrated with their campaign books (because it's a natural extension of that product line) then they'd get more life out of their product, and they'd see less swelling in rules/mechanics. Yet historically we don't see WotC do that. They may release a module that covers a few levels (Revenge of the Giants is labeled a "Super Adventure" but only takes you from level 12 to 17), but commonly there's a lack of coherence or substance to these adventures, and often times they're just not very good. Therefore, I believe that for 5E to be successful they need to address the issue of modules and content as well as the issue of rules.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 22:54 |
|
|
Korlac posted:What I'm saying is that WotC causes they're own product to bloat and become unwieldy because they only focus on the mechanics side of the equation and don't pay much attention to the content side. By releasing nothing but builder books and campaign guides, each with new powers, feats, rituals, spells, etc..., the overall mechanics swell extremely fast. EDIT: On top of that they did actually try what you are suggesting early on in 4E's lifetime. It didn't work all that well because they abaonded that publishing scheme. In terms of setting books you had Open Grave, Manual of the Planes, Plane Above Secrets of the Elemental Chaos, Plane Below, and Demonomicon.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 23:01 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2013 23:59 |
|
|
Korlac posted:If you buy the core books books (PHB, DMG, MM) which in theory is all you need to play, they simply explain how to play D&D. At most I believe the DMG has a little mini-adventure in the back of it. How are mechanics not content? While it might be a little opaque, the method to get a group of friends together and play an elfgame without deciding to then stab each-other IS the content. While it might not be fun to read on the crapper, or debate the finer points on the internet forum, RPGs aren't actually about having a pre-built story to sell in the same way that comic books are. I simply inherently disagree with your first presumption, and therefore deny the entire screed.
|
| # ? Jul 10, 2012 23:13 |
|
