PDA

View Full Version : The Future of the Edition War



Flame of Anor
2012-01-24, 02:26 AM
Disclaimer: This is not a battlefield on which to fight the Edition War. Anyone who doesn't seem to be making a good faith effort to follow this rule will be subjected to the most severe smallannoyed, smallmad, or even smallfurious faces.


The true purpose of the thread is this: to discuss where the editions' factions will go from here. Back in the day, if TSR put out a new edition, you generally would change over. But 4th Edition was so unappealing to some players that that changed. Now D&D is factionalized.

Will the 3.x faction slowly die out? Will they perhaps skip 4e and jump to 5e, rather like many users of Windows XP are skipping Vista and making the shift to Windows 7?

Will the factionalization remain and grow? Will we have the 3.x faction, the 4e faction, and the 5e faction? Then, in ten years, the 3.x faction, the 4e faction, the 5e faction, the 2nd-Edition-of-5e:-Electric-Boogaloo faction, the 5.3.x faction, and the Beholders-'N'-Bustiers faction?

Will the factionalization remain only with 3.x? Many players are distrustful of the commercialization and simplification of D&D as shown by 4e. If that continues with 5e, we could see two distinct factions emerge: the 3.x classicists, and the We'll-play-whatever-they're-currently-releasing-content-for faction.


What does the Playground think? Keep it nice, guys.

Manateee
2012-01-24, 02:42 AM
Who can resist a cheap shot?

EDIT:
Partisanship along the lines of game edition preference is laughable in the first place. I doubt that the digs and snide backhands that blow up into edition wars have anywhere near as much to do with the game systems in question as they do with personal traits of the people making those comments. Even comparing 4e and OD&D, the game hasn't changed much beyond its expanding mechanical complexity.

People just really like to fight over this stuff.

Mordokai
2012-01-24, 02:48 AM
People are still playing AD&D and it's been what, twenty years? More?

I foresee the trend will keep up. That is to say, some people will continue playing 3.5, some will move on. Some will be able to accept it, some won't. Personally, I intend to stay with 3.5, since I consider it a waste of money to buy a new set of books if they will continue chuggin' out new edition every couple of years. I've learned to love 4E and I believe, with time, I will be able to claim the same for 5E, unless it's really unappealing. But I don't intend to spend a stinkin' dime on a new edition for books or any other material.

Reluctance
2012-01-24, 02:51 AM
There are still TSR-era D&D fans. The reason the 3.5/4e split is so pronounced is because
WotC made an active effort to make the 2e => 3e change relatively minor, and then made a huge leap with 4th. Many of the people who liked all that D&D was before rebelled at what's basically a completely different game. For comparison, while many 4e fans dislike Essentials, I don't recall ever seeing a flame war on the topic.

Further edition wars will depend entirely on continuity. If my hunch is correct and 5e winds up building from 3.5's design space, the 3.5 community will start to filter over as more content is produced. If 5e is a whole new thing, prepare for more factionalization. I doubt you'll get as much vitriol as you did when the 3.5 line was cut off, but edition wars are based on how much of the old user base you can keep happy.

Whether keeping old fans happy - as opposed to making the game welcoming for new blood - is in the best interest of the game/hobby as a whole remains to be seen.

Eldan
2012-01-24, 03:08 AM
I think that I have all the rules that I'll need to play D&D between teh books I already have and homebrew. I might consider good books of relatively rules-independent fluff or interesting new settings, but I rather doubt we'll see many of those. And I'm pretty happy with the rules for 3.5 as they are.

If I am to learn a new system, I'd rather learn one that is thematically different from D&D. I've started to look into WoD and Shadowrun recently (those are the only locally played games), and FATE is also a system I like very much.

Totally Guy
2012-01-24, 03:25 AM
During the last edition war I decided to read more games. One that were designed with different aims and paradigms to D&D.

From here I will continue to seek out games that match the play experiences that I want. The new D&D may be what I want but based on D&D's past and current player expectations it probably won't be.

Flame of Anor
2012-01-24, 03:32 AM
There are still TSR-era D&D fans. The reason the 3.5/4e split is so pronounced is because
WotC made an active effort to make the 2e => 3e change relatively minor, and then made a huge leap with 4th. Many of the people who liked all that D&D was before rebelled at what's basically a completely different game. For comparison, while many 4e fans dislike Essentials, I don't recall ever seeing a flame war on the topic.

Yeah...I've always said that they should call 4e "D&D 2nd Edition", as 3.x is technically AD&D 3.x, and "4e" is less "Advanced" in terms of complicated rules.

Leolo
2012-01-24, 03:44 AM
It simple depends on the content of the game and how the community likes it. We don't know anything about this now. And please don't make the fault in believing the current marketing phrases like "oh it's so old school", "sure we want to listen you"

Not even the designers currently know how it will look like in the end.

So it is simple too early simple to discuss this.

I do hope that the last edition war has got enough people to the conclusion that it is better to read the books first, and judge them by what is actually written in it. But in the end it does not matter, 5e just has to be a good game to find it's players.

Totally Guy
2012-01-24, 08:18 AM
I do hope that the last edition war has got enough people to the conclusion that it is better to read the books first, and judge them by what is actually written in it. But in the end it does not matter, 5e just has to be a good game to find it's players.

You're right but I'd go one step further. Participants also need to judge the game they prefer by only what is written in the book. People make all kinds of additions and omissions but those parts comes from them and not from the game.

Kurald Galain
2012-01-24, 08:39 AM
For comparison, while many 4e fans dislike Essentials, I don't recall ever seeing a flame war on the topic.
Oh, there have been a few, especially on the WOTC forums.


The main question here is, what will 5E be like? It can't seriously be like everybody's favorite edition all at the same time, like marketing suggests. If it mostly resembles 3E (which I doubt) then I expect most 3E players to switch, and most PF players to stay where they are. If it mostly resembles 4E, then I expect most 4.4 players and players who use all of 4E to switch, and most 4.0-only players to stay where they are. If it resembles neither, then it would be mostly aimed at new players, and I expect a lot of existing players will try it for a bit and stick with their favorite.

Columns suggest that the most recent 4E books are in fact a try-out for fifth edition, just like how the last 3E books (tome of battle, mostly) was in fact a try-out for fourth.

$.02

hamlet
2012-01-24, 08:50 AM
The D&D fanbase has been factionalized from the very first time there was a 2nd printing of D&D. Woodgrained box to White Box. Seriously. I don't see that changing as there are still lots of people who say that the Little Brown Books are the perfect and original incarnation of the game and all others are heresy, and there's a group like that for every single variation on the game. There are few, relatively speaking, who take each edition on its own merits and use them for what they do best each.

As for 5th edition, I'm honestly curious. It really seems, at first blush, that WOTC is reaching out a hand, again, to the old school crowd, those that stuck with AD&D, and is sort of, kind of, apologizing for spending along time essentially insulting them. Yes, we know there's a hook in that bait (they want us friendlier so that we might look over at their new edition, too), but it's really a nice change from "those old games were unfun and unplayable and this new version is just da bomb!" so there are at least a few who are interested in looking it over with a more charitable view this time round. Including me.

In terms of edition wars, I foresee some pretty nasty fights, but can't tell where the battle lines will be drawn until more info is leaked out. It really depends on the shape of things to come. Especially since, from what little I've seen, it seems that Monte and the design crew are making some effort to cast a broader net over the fan base this time as they very significantly limited themselves in 4e. They're trying to bring the fans home again from Pathfinder, OSRIC, and the like. It remains to be seen just how successful they are.

TheArsenal
2012-01-24, 09:28 AM
There is an elements of WOTC being brought down in a sense. Made more humble.

It was like "PFF yeah, OUR next game is the BEST your edition SUCKS! CON damage whats that? YOUR all IDOITS! WE are SO sure that we will succeed that we are going to make a cartoon of a dragon LITERALLY taking a poop on you all! HA! Whatcha gonna do? We have the industry man!"

5 years later..

"Hey, um...would you love to test our game? Oh we WANT to help ALL of you guys man, we love you all and hope to make a game for all of you!"

Im not sure. While there is an aspect of genuiness in it its also kinda fackey. Its that corporate BS talk that just really tints the company. Sometimes I wish they just said flat out what they mean.

And it all depends on the game realy. Thats whats going to happen.

Bearpunch
2012-01-24, 09:49 AM
Unless 5e is some sort of godly incarnation of D&D, I will probably stick with 4e/PF. Not that I don't like new things, its that I prefer my wallet to have money in it.

Dr. Yes
2012-01-24, 09:56 AM
For my group, at least, a big part of whether we switch will depend on how easy it is to access 5e material without purchasing a shelf full of sourcebooks. We've played 4th, d20 Modern, and Pathfinder, but we keep coming back to Pathfinder because everything you could possibly need to know is available in one place in a convenient, searchable format on the SRD. I think in general, there's a large set of people who are willing to play tabletop RPGs and a much smaller subset who are willing to dump money into the hobby, and it's much easier to put a game together if you're not limiting yourself to the latter set.

INDYSTAR188
2012-01-24, 10:01 AM
There are still TSR-era D&D fans. The reason the 3.5/4e split is so pronounced is because WotC made an active effort to make the 2e => 3e change relatively minor, and then made a huge leap with 4th. Many of the people who liked all that D&D was before rebelled at what's basically a completely different game. For comparison, while many 4e fans dislike Essentials, I don't recall ever seeing a flame war on the topic.

I agree with you the jump from 3.5 => 4E was pretty massive. I play 4E because I like the balance and simplified rules. Don't get me wrong, I still love some 3.5, but I prefer that everyone at the table has a chance to feel like their character is as awesome as the next guys. I do not like Essentials and see it as another money grab on Wizards part. I will continue to game w/4E until 5E has been out for a year or two and we can see what more of the source books and what not have to offer. I'm pretty excited to see what they can come up with, but not so excited I'm going to drop another couple hundred bucks just cuz they took the time to pump out a new set of rules.

navar100
2012-01-24, 12:51 PM
It depends what 5E is.

Many 3E players moved on to Pathfinder since they chose to continue the 3E model. Some 3E players won't, but the model will continue on and provide a haven for those who did not join the 4E bandwagon.

5E is WOTC's test to their true feelings on the matter. While I don't expect it to be 3E with just the number 3 replaced with the number 5 on the front cover, if WOTC cares about bring back its 3E customers 5E content will have stuff such customers want.

Until 5E is published, I'll be watching while playing Pathfinder.

Tanuki Tales
2012-01-24, 12:56 PM
5th Edition needs to be some holy grail of gaming that is incredibly better than Pathfinder to get me to even consider running a pre-generated box session with it.

I'm very content with 3.Pathfinder and I'm very content with what Pathfinder is doing with their game and business models.

WoTC very much alienated me when they made what they called "4th Edition" and they'll need to beg and scrape to get my loyalty back.

Tengu_temp
2012-01-24, 12:58 PM
War, war never changes. There will just be one more faction in the conflict.

TheArsenal
2012-01-24, 01:23 PM
Pretty much. Eventualy it reaches a point where you ask "Do I NEED a new edition?"

You can keep one edition running with lots of fluff and good and creative campaign settings. I for one WISH there was a dark sun for 3.5.

Tvtyrant
2012-01-24, 01:28 PM
The next addition war will look like this: (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=106111)

hamlet
2012-01-24, 01:41 PM
Pretty much. Eventualy it reaches a point where you ask "Do I NEED a new edition?"

You can keep one edition running with lots of fluff and good and creative campaign settings. I for one WISH there was a dark sun for 3.5.

I remember Dragon Magazine having some Dark Sun stuff in it for 3.x, and then the fan led initiative for it that should still be posted on the web somewhere.

For whatever it's worth.

NikitaDarkstar
2012-01-24, 02:02 PM
Don't have time to read it all now, but think about it. D&D is already split into factions, and has been since long before 4ed came out. You have the 3.X players, the groups that swear that anything after AD&D is pure and utter blasphemy, the rare groups that refuses to move past 1ed and so on. Why would this change? You'll still have people who'll prefer 3.X/3.5, people who love 4ed and you'll get people who like 5ed, neither will be better than any other one, they'll just appeal to different people.

hamishspence
2012-01-24, 02:17 PM
I think The Giant said it best:


When it comes right down to it, the so-called "Edition Wars" really amount to a battle not over which system is objectively better, but over whether or not the base of players needs to accept a new system just because that system is published. On one side of the debate, there's the knowledge that no one can break into your house at night and burn your existing books; if you want to keep playing an old edition, nothing is physically stopping you. Heck, lots of people still play First Edition, or Original D&D! On the other hand, by doing so, you are making a conscious decision to separate yourself from those who are following the current product lines. If enough people refuse to convert, then it becomes harder for both sides to find people for their gaming groups. If you try to play both editions simultaneously, you end up splitting your gaming time such that neither game really gets your full attention. Few people have enough free time to play in multiple gaming groups. So, system aside, there are compelling arguments for either staying current or sticking with the one you love even if progress marches on. There are no easy answers.

As the hobby goes on, and there's a Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh edition, probably all within our lifetime if the game doesn't die off, I expect the rancor between factions will become less intense. When there are a dozen different flavors of D&D to choose from, it will seem somewhat silly to fervently declare loyalty to one (and only one) of them. Gamers will need to be at least passingly conversant in all of the extant editions just to be able to move between different gaming groups. You'll have one group playing Third Edition but poaching the saving throw rules from Sixth Edition, another playing Fifth edition but reinstating the alignment rules from First Edition, and a third group playing cutting-edge Ninth Edition by interfacing their brainstems directly with the DM-O-Matic 4500 and using their actual psionic powers to tell their characters to manifest pretend psionic powers. It'll be crazy, you wait and see.

erikun
2012-01-24, 03:22 PM
When AD&D came out, there were people who stuck with OD&D.
When 2nd edition came out, there were people who stuck with 1st edition.
When 3rd edition came out, there were people who stuck with AD&D.
When 4th edition came out, there were people who stuck with 3rd edition.

When 5th edition comes out, there will be people who stick with 4th edition. And 3rd edition, and 2nd edition, and AD&D, and even the few OD&D players.


As a side note, I think the 3rd edition "faction" has mostly died out by this point. Most 3e players, or at least most who are vocally speaking about their edition, have moved onto Pathfinder or 4e. I'm seeing people who play Pathfinder and claim it to be the best, and I'm seeing people who play 4e and claim it to be the best. But I'm not seeing that many people remaining who play only 3rd edition (non-Pathfinder) and claiming superiority, at least not many more than who make the same claims for AD&D or other editions.

Manateee
2012-01-24, 03:33 PM
In actual play (ie. my experience outside messageboards), it's usually more a matter of what's available than anything. For my group PF is currently the most favorable of the late-gen D&D-spinoffs - not because any of us like it better than 3e or 4e, but because it has the most free support.

And our most-used systems for D&D-type games are things like Dungeon World and Warrior Rogue and Mage, for similar reasons.

Jeraa
2012-01-24, 04:06 PM
A "faction" will never die out totally. There will always be people playing it somewhere. 1st edition is still played and loved by many. In fact, that "faction" may grow somewhat, as WotC is reprinting the 1st edition books.

Kurald Galain
2012-01-24, 04:23 PM
As a side note, I think the 3rd edition "faction" has mostly died out by this point.

I don't think so. There's this popular webcomic based on 3E rules, you know...

More to the point, http://d20srd.org is still up and scoring an Alexa rank of 198,000 (89,000 in the US). That's not high-profile, but neither is it obscure.

MukkTB
2012-01-24, 05:24 PM
Im not sure. While there is an aspect of genuiness in it its also kinda fackey. Its that corporate BS talk that just really tints the company. Sometimes I wish they just said flat out what they mean.

I'm pretty sure they are saying what they mean.
4E: We don't care at all for people who don't stay with the most up to date edition.

5E: We're sorry and we're trying to make everyone happy so you'll come back and love us.

TheArsenal
2012-01-24, 05:29 PM
I'm pretty sure they are saying what they mean.
4E: We don't care at all for people who don't stay with the most up to date edition.

5E: We're sorry and we're trying to make everyone happy so you'll come back and love us.

I just wish they SAID that. A public apology would be great. Simply something like

"look, were sorry. We wen't too far and tried to deny it. Please give us your money"

But no its all colored and Tinted.

edit:

For example, they COULD address 3e, the gorila in the corner (I don't think they mention it by name. Its either silly 1e or elegant 4e)

They could address how they hope to fix the balance without making it utterly dull.

From this article (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ro3/20120124) I don't have much hope. While this article did address some of my concerns I just wish they addressed what they hoped to do with casting. That is MY biggest question.

Manateee
2012-01-24, 05:34 PM
WotC should apologize to its players because WotC rewrote the game in a way to address the complaints posed by players of their previous game?

That's hilarious.

MukkTB
2012-01-24, 05:35 PM
Corporate speak is kind of like that. Still for corporate speak they've been very straightforward.

Eldan
2012-01-24, 05:44 PM
WotC should apologize to its players because WotC rewrote the game in a way to address the complaints posed by players of their previous game?

That's hilarious.

No, not at all. It would be nice, however, for apologizing for their marketing of fourth edition, which included a quite heavy dose of "remember the old editions? Man, those suck! Who would ever want to play that! And remember those settings? Unplayable! Totally unplayable! Only a moron would like it!"

And that was before those pretty primitive cartoons.

TheArsenal
2012-01-24, 05:47 PM
WotC should apologize to its players because WotC rewrote the game in a way to address the complaints posed by players of their previous game?

That's hilarious.

No, for making that goddam cartoon. I STILL cannot get over it.

Yes, im stubborn and stupid.

Kurald Galain
2012-01-24, 05:54 PM
No, not at all. It would be nice, however, for apologizing for their marketing of fourth edition, which included a quite heavy dose of "remember the old editions? Man, those suck!

I'm quite sure that whoever did that marketing doesn't work at WOTC any more - and that, in a way, is a corporate apology. "Our lawyers tell us to neither confirm nor deny whether we are sorry, but we did fire the guy who upset you. Now buy some books please."

Hm, maybe too big a part of the identity of 4E is simply "that game that is not 3E". It does seem to have been marketed as such, at least for awhile.

Chess435
2012-01-24, 05:56 PM
No, for making that goddam cartoon. I STILL cannot get over it.

Yes, im stubborn and stupid.

What cartoon? :smallconfused:

TheArsenal
2012-01-24, 05:57 PM
Its THAT whats scaring me off mostly. This hyper corporate stance on everything. Its just scary. It just makes me feel like they want MONEY instead of wanting to create a good game (and inadvertently making money)


What cartoon? :smallconfused:

This one. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Azcn84IIDVg)

Your opinion nothing. 4e is the ****ing ****. :smallannoyed:

TheEmerged
2012-01-24, 06:19 PM
Its THAT whats scaring me off mostly. This hyper corporate stance on everything. Its just scary. It just makes me feel like they want MONEY instead of wanting to create a good game (and inadvertently making money)

O_o

o_O

/voice=badrussian
In Capitalist America, money make you!

/voice=default
No seriously, they're in business to make money. How is that a surprise? Just about the only way to inadvertently make money is to win the lottery or somesuch.

Kurald Galain
2012-01-24, 06:30 PM
No seriously, they're in business to make money. How is that a surprise? Just about the only way to inadvertently make money is to win the lottery or somesuch.

Sure, but even between businesses that make money, there is a pretty obvious sliding scale with idealistic companies on the one hand, and sell-their-own-mother companies on the other.

The Glyphstone
2012-01-24, 06:36 PM
Man, now I can't wait for 9th edition.

bloodtide
2012-01-24, 07:38 PM
I think you will see permanent factions. At least of older D&D up to 3X. I'm sure the 4E 'fad' of gaming will just quickly be forgotten like many other games in the past.

Even if 5E is the best game ever...and it would need to be to get any sales....I doubt it will sell very much. Even if most people wanted to buy it, few people have the money to do so(when you consider the 'Core Rules' will be around $100). And that is if it was the best game ever. Even if you flipped through the book and found it beyond WOW....you'd still get the huge sticker shock when you got to the back cover and saw the $35(or more...) price. In 2012 it will be hard for most people to spend that much money on a single book, let alone three times that for all the 'Core Rules'. And that is on top of WotC doing shenanigans like 'oh we put the good dragons in another book so you'd have to by that book too...Muuhahahahaa'.

And that is IF 5E is the best book ever. If it's anything less then that...it likely won't sell at all. It's very unlikely that they will find any 'new' gamer customers. If you like classic role-playing you can play 3x/P, if you like 'balanced wow' you can play 4th. What notch does that leave for 5e? Nothing much at all.

megahobbit
2012-01-24, 10:08 PM
As much as I would like to run of into my corner with my Adnd books, i do think that the edition wars are at an end. Even if the next edition is the messiah destined to bring all editions together the edition wars are over. Also id like to point out that every edition got something wrong from class/race restrictions(which i just ignored) to over complictation (3.x) or a huge overhaul(4e).

Tanuki Tales
2012-01-24, 10:26 PM
Am I the only one who found those cartoons being the only bit of 4th edition they liked?

erikun
2012-01-24, 11:00 PM
This one. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Azcn84IIDVg)
Wow, that is quite a bit worse than I remember.


Am I the only one who found those cartoons being the only bit of 4th edition they liked?
Eh, I thought the gnome was rather amusing at times. It's certainly not how I play a gnome (I'm a big fan of the race), but you should be able to laugh at your own stereotype.

The biggest problem with it, though, is that a lot of people left with the impressing that gnomes were just kender under a different name. :smallannoyed: That kind of assumption gets kind of annoying, especially when it's the DM and he ends up assuming your character is automatically the random crazy inventor stereotype.


Its THAT whats scaring me off mostly. This hyper corporate stance on everything. Its just scary. It just makes me feel like they want MONEY instead of wanting to create a good game (and inadvertently making money)
Given that they've learned that not listening to their audience and ignoring roleplay interaction over tactical gameplay loses them money, I would certainly hope they are paying attention rather than just going along with whatever random ideas a single person has in mind.

Velaryon
2012-01-25, 12:32 AM
Am I the only one who found those cartoons being the only bit of 4th edition they liked?

Other than the rather offensive "anybody who complains about 4th edition is a troll" bit they snuck into the middle of the cartoon, I found it rather charming. And I have no use for 4e, so I guess these caroons would be my favorite thing about it.

Flame of Anor
2012-01-25, 02:54 AM
As a side note, I think the 3rd edition "faction" has mostly died out by this point.

You're kidding yourself, man. Just look at how popular the 3.x board (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=59) is on this very site--and only one in six or so of those threads has a (Pathfinder) tag; most are 3.5.


No, not at all. It would be nice, however, for apologizing for their marketing of fourth edition, which included a quite heavy dose of "remember the old editions? Man, those suck! Who would ever want to play that! And remember those settings? Unplayable! Totally unplayable! Only a moron would like it!"

What kinds of things are you referring to? I missed most of the 4e marketing, and now I'm intrigued.


Man, now I can't wait for 9th edition.

The Glyphstone's in my thread! :biggrin:

Tvtyrant
2012-01-25, 03:08 AM
I think you will see permanent factions. At least of older D&D up to 3X. I'm sure the 4E 'fad' of gaming will just quickly be forgotten like many other games in the past.

I don't buy this one. There are plenty of people who play 4E and enjoy it.

It is also slightly insulting to call a game type a 'fad' considering that miniature combat is actually older than D&D, and that games like Warhammer are well represented. Maybe its not the same as what came before it, but it has certainly done well enough not to be simply dismissed.

Grac
2012-01-25, 03:33 AM
Man, now I can't wait for 9th edition.

This... I want those psionic powers dammit.

Eldan
2012-01-25, 04:55 AM
What kinds of things are you referring to? I missed most of the 4e marketing, and now I'm intrigued.


Well, the WotC site is a mess thatn I can't really navigate to find the articles, but around the time of the relese, there was a series of articles about new things they were going to include. Amongst other things, they mentioned the Elemental Planes as being boring and elementals as creatures that had no place in the game. Apparently, dangerous planes (like the plane of fire) are too hostile to low-level adventurers and therefore should go. They also mentioned Eladrin (outsiders no one ever used! Ha!) and said that the name was cool, so it should just be reused on elves. Or how the Great Wheel was full of places no one ever went to. Or how nine alignments were really too much and on one knew the difference between neutral evil and lawful evil anyway.
Which all annoyed me quite a bit, as a Planescape player.

turkishproverb
2012-01-25, 05:25 AM
Heck, if you want to talk about horrible marketing, let's talk about fraud.


Only a couple months before they announced the RELEASE DATE for 4th edition, they said it wasn't even in the works.

Soylent Dave
2012-01-25, 05:31 AM
No, for making that goddam cartoon. I STILL cannot get over it.


What cartoon? :smallconfused:


This one. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Azcn84IIDVg)


Wow, that is quite a bit worse than I remember.


I still haven't forgiven them for the cartoon they did in the 80s with that bloody unicorn.

RedWarlock
2012-01-25, 05:36 AM
Hah! I loved those cartoons!

You didn't get that those were jokes? They never said anything like 'anyone who has a word against 4e is a troll', they specifically showed a troll doing nothing but gripe and rage (he was a troll, being a troll).

This was after release, if someone looked at 4e and decided they don't care for it, they should have just walked away, not rage against the game. Complaints can be heard and addressed, but anyone who does nothing BUT argue, complain, and be annoying is just being a troll. 4e wasn't ever going to win this small subset of players over, so why not make a joke about it?

To me, it looks like you took offense because you thought a joke about one small group (those who would never convert to 4e, regardless of what changes were made) applied to the wider group you might have been in (those who didn't care for 4e as is, but might be willing to try if some changes were made).

And I'll just say, I never saw any ads that actually *dumped* on pre-4e editions. That sounds a bit overblown.

turkishproverb
2012-01-25, 05:42 AM
You think those were a joke? How about the fact they referred to second edition as "The antithesis of fun". Not the cartoons. The public comments from designers. In their lead up to 4E.

Eldan
2012-01-25, 05:57 AM
Oh god. I'm having "fun" flashbacks.

There were these horrible articles where they seemed contractually obligated to use the word "fun" twice per sentence. Especially in making lists of things that were not fun.

TheArsenal
2012-01-25, 06:06 AM
Except the troll mentions variable and actually quite relavant criticism every time.

Its oversimplified, you need to buy allot more books to get the same amount of content the core books gave, ect.

Not to mention its incredibly juvenile.

I especially love The comment from The alexandrian. The insight into their mind is so twisted and bizarre.

"We identified a problem"

Yay

"We have a idea to fix it"

YES!

"But were throwing the fix out the window and doing this other thing"

......What.


Like for example, they said that having all the dragons EVIL or GOOD was kinda lame and unrealistic.
YES
And wanted to fix that adding neutrality to the game.
YES
By making all the Metallic Dragons Neutral and stupid and a-ok for slaughter
........What.

Leolo
2012-01-25, 07:01 AM
By making all the Metallic Dragons Neutral and stupid and a-ok for slaughter
........What.

Or not? Because, you know....they didn't?

Metallic dragons just can be evil or neutral, or justify bad things by wanting somme greater good.

Doesn't sound that bad for me. And most of them are still good.

Totally Guy
2012-01-25, 07:50 AM
Re: the cartoon:

My interpretation was that the sycophantic kobolds were an allegory for those people who fanatically love 4th edition without thinking about why.

blackseven
2012-01-25, 08:04 AM
This was after release, if someone looked at 4e and decided they don't care for it, they should have just walked away, not rage against the game. Complaints can be heard and addressed, but anyone who does nothing BUT argue, complain, and be annoying is just being a troll.

What's so sad about that whole situation is that, for the entire lead up to 4th Ed, there was a sizable group on these very boards that fit that description to a T. They, in general, not only voiced their subjective displeasure at the upcoming edition (which is perfectly okay), they made pronouncements declaring that the new edition was objectively inferior (which is much more difficult to accept), and even worse, went to ad hominems regarding the *evil* profit motives of WOTC and the intellectual capacity of those who might adopt 4th Ed.

In fact, I think I recognize some of them in this very thread.

TheArsenal
2012-01-25, 09:44 AM
Or not? Because, you know....they didn't?

Metallic dragons just can be evil or neutral, or justify bad things by wanting somme greater good.

Doesn't sound that bad for me. And most of them are still good.

WIthout making the evil dragons neutral either. :smallannoyed:

Yeah. Make all the Good Dragons stupid (As in, raze a village to the ground because its trying to kill a demon that might be there") and wonderfully killable yet no changes to the ordinary dragons. Moral Neutrality indeed.

You might say "well this is just fluff". It sets the mindset, and it changes how all the core products will treat the dragons.

Bearpunch
2012-01-25, 09:50 AM
I didn't find the Metallic dragons to be dumb in the fluff. Granted, the fluff I read is only from MM2, the Draconomicon (or whatever) might say something different.

Tanuki Tales
2012-01-25, 10:11 AM
Other than the rather offensive "anybody who complains about 4th edition is a troll" bit they snuck into the middle of the cartoon, I found it rather charming. And I have no use for 4e, so I guess these caroons would be my favorite thing about it.

Meh. I've got way thicker skin than that so I just found that bit one of the 'toon most amusing. A forum troll being a literal Troll? Hilarious.

Like I said, I've got thicker skin, WoTC had lost me before I'd ever found the cartoons on Youtube and I don't particularly care what some company thinks when they've already showed the little amount of regard they had for their consumers.

Leolo
2012-01-25, 10:43 AM
WIthout making the evil dragons neutral either. :smallannoyed:

Yeah. Make all the Good Dragons stupid (As in, raze a village to the ground because its trying to kill a demon that might be there") and wonderfully killable yet no changes to the ordinary dragons. Moral Neutrality indeed.

You might say "well this is just fluff". It sets the mindset, and it changes how all the core products will treat the dragons.

No i might say it is not what they have written in the books. For example: Yes, they do write that all those non metallic dragons do not have to be evil now. Most of them are, though.

So what are you talking about when you say "without making the evil dragons neutral either"? They simple say dragons have a tendency to a side, but an individual dragon is individual.

You keep using the term "all the good dragons" and this is exactly the opposite of this change. There is no "all the good/evil dragons behave like this" any more. Plus i do not think that adding motivations to dragons does make them "perfectly killable". Because characters could share this motivations. Or at least understand them.

Or don't you think so? All they are saying is: Yes, good dragons can be antagonists in your story, look at these examples how you could use them.

That is far away from "By making all the Metallic Dragons Neutral and stupid and a-ok for slaughter"

In fact it is the opposite of it.

TheArsenal
2012-01-25, 11:09 AM
No i might say it is not what they have written in the books. For example: Yes, they do write that all those non metallic dragons do not have to be evil now. Most of them are, though.

My point was they where standing on a pedastal yelling how much the newer edition is going to be morally neutral...Followed by making the Dragons that USED to be good stupid neutral and no changes for the evil dragons. Don't tell me that was not their plan. In the Chromatic Draconomicon, they only mentioned a good dragon ONCE, and the Metalic Draconomicon they mentioned Evil Dragons ALWAYS (And yes, my yelling of cash grubbing is justified if they just split the Draconomicon into two books).

They just made Good dragons Killable. Same thing with Storm and Cloud Giants.

Flame of Anor
2012-01-25, 03:42 PM
This one. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Azcn84IIDVg)

Wow, that's a really stupid cartoon.

MukkTB
2012-01-25, 05:10 PM
I do think that the edition wars are at an end.

What? I see fires burning in this very thread. Insults are being hurled across the no mans land just posts above mine.

5E will probably do this:
http://xkcd.com/927/

And we will have another faction on the field insulting everyone else's intelligence, motives, and rights to an opinion.

TheArsenal
2012-01-25, 05:33 PM
There wont be as much major warring as in 4e. Mostly because they wont be insulting everybody this time.

TheThan
2012-01-25, 06:29 PM
People tend to stick to systems they like. So you will always have people that play 3e, or 4e, or 5e when it is released. I think most people will give it a curious glance, decide if they’re interested enough to shell out the cash for the books and give it a try. From there if they like the game enough, they’ll make the switch. So at any given time, there will always be people playing any given system.

Now that is not to say people won’t bash on systems they don’t like. Its very easy to be very vocal about what you hate and how much you hate it. It’s easy to sit at a computer and type out a big long hateful post or blog or somesuch detailing how much you hate something and that everyone who disagrees with you can go die in a fire for all you care. People who hate, tend to hate loudly, so loudly that it seems like that, no one likes said thing people are hating over.

navar100
2012-01-25, 08:23 PM
WotC should apologize to its players because WotC rewrote the game in a way to address the complaints posed by players of their previous game?

That's hilarious.

They threw the baby out with the bath water.

stainboy
2012-01-25, 09:38 PM
I don't think so. There's this popular webcomic based on 3E rules, you know...

More to the point, http://d20srd.org is still up and scoring an Alexa rank of 198,000 (89,000 in the US). That's not high-profile, but neither is it obscure.

Hey, so it is.

It looks like the Pathfinder SRD (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/) ranks 192,000, and only has about 1.4% more traffic.

There are a lot of people still playing 3.5, but I don't think there's necessarily a 3.5 "camp" that's separate from the Pathfinder "camp." Lots of 3.5 players use some PF content and vice versa. Hell, I would say most PF players use at least a few 3.5 feat and spell writeups.

RedWarlock
2012-01-25, 10:35 PM
They threw the baby out with the bath water.

Interesting aphorism there, but I think a lot of people have differing definitions of what the baby versus bathwater was.

bloodtide
2012-01-25, 10:46 PM
I don't buy this one. There are plenty of people who play 4E and enjoy it.

It is also slightly insulting to call a game type a 'fad' considering that miniature combat is actually older than D&D, and that games like Warhammer are well represented. Maybe its not the same as what came before it, but it has certainly done well enough not to be simply dismissed.

Well, 0-1-2-3 E are all quite the same in a lot of basics, and most people have played them for years and years(decades, even). And while each edition is different, it's not like the 'not even the same game' approach that 4E took.

And older editions of the game have people who played characters for years, in long, long running campaigns. That's a far, far cry from the people that play 4E for the ''wow, we killed a dragon happy dance feeling'', as 4E is all about the action and the combat(yes when your book has 350 combat powers and 35 utility powers your game is a combat game).

And a lot of 4E gamers are the types that either a)Play anything 'New' or b)Play what they are told is the 'official supported game'. As this is at least 50% of the 4E base, they will all automatically switch to 5E as they are 'told too' by advertising and such. Plenty of people will always switch to the 'new and improved' whatever it is...

So the end result is that you won't see very many 4E gamers after 5E comes out...

Reverent-One
2012-01-25, 11:22 PM
So the end result is that you won't see very many 4E gamers after 5E comes out...

You know, somehow I doubt you are qualified to speak on behalf of "at least 50% of the 4E base".

Starbuck_II
2012-01-25, 11:22 PM
War, war never changes. There will just be one more faction in the conflict.
"War, war never changes."
When the creators of the game rules engineered a new edition, many took to the streets and internet to fight over naunces and terms that seem at first to matter to no one.
Little did they know it would be the start of a nuclear war. Soon there would be fallout...
Luckily, the brillant man at Vault-tec for saw this. Get your vault today!

But enough fallout jokes:
I loved the cartoons of 4E.

And since they are making 5E compatible with earlier editions (supposedly) I don't see the factions being a big issue.

MukkTB
2012-01-25, 11:57 PM
I'm optimistic about 5E. It might be decent and it isn't going to make my D&D experience any worse. If I don't like it then there is always pathfinder.

On the other hand I feel really wary about this 'please everyone' idea. It seems dangerous to the edition. "Try to please everyone and please no one," comes to the front of my mind every time.

Roland St. Jude
2012-01-25, 11:59 PM
Sheriff: Despite the OPs disclaimer, this thread is merely an invitation to edition warring. And not just any edition warring, but all edition warring. Not to mention the OP starting it off on such a fallacious note that it is plainly doomed to flaming.