D&D version 4.0--what do YOU think it's going to be like • Page 6 • Collecting General • The Acaeum

The Acaeum Forums • Collecting General

D&D version 4.0--what do YOU think it's going to be like
	Page 6 of 26 • 1 2 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 24 25 26

Author

Deadlord
Grandstanding Collector

Posts: 5885
Joined: Jun 30, 2003
Last Visit: Jul 31, 2026
Location: Cow Hampshire, US

Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2008 3:08 pm

Uh oh. According to Chick, I shoudln't be worshipping Yog-Sothoth and sacrificing kittens in my birdbath. It's the Lake of Fire for me...........

If you hit a Rowsdower, you get to keep it.

Kingofpain89
Long-Winded Collector

Posts: 4756
Joined: Oct 31, 2004
Last Visit: May 02, 2025
Location: Caddo Mills, TX

Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2008 3:29 pm

NetRodent wrote:

I would love to get a copy of that tract. Unfortunately it's out of print and so they seem to only be available by special order and sure don't need 10,000 of them.

Search harder:

http://cgi.ebay.com/D-D-Dark-Dungeons-C ... dZViewItem

You don't like your job, you don't strike. You go in every day and do it really half-assed. That's the American way. - Homer Simpson

Grug Greyskin
Prolific Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 632
Joined: Mar 17, 2008
Last Visit: Jul 26, 2026
Location: Evergreen, CO

Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2008 9:24 pm

Kingofpain89 wrote:

Search harder:

** expired/removed eBay auction **

And the same seller had two other copies up in recent weeks. This was the more expensive of the two.

** expired/removed eBay auction **

sauromatian
Sage Collector

Posts: 2554
Joined: Jul 25, 2007
Last Visit: Jan 06, 2024
Location: Far Harad, Texas

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:46 am

Busman wrote:Old timers don't want new rules

Basically neither do I. The first posts I made on this topic were self-indulgent if-I-were-president-of-Hasbro meanderings that won't happen. Now I'm wondering what they might actually make down the road.

Indisputably, they do occasionally produce such product. There was a 10th An. Set, the 25th An. we've discussed, & recently a lavish coffeetable book featuring pictures of classic covers.

What I have in mind is more of a functional game. As such I think the publisher would be more likely to do it if it could be made a gateway to the current line.

Busman wrote:...new timers don't want old art and It seems like a Frankenstein's monster of stuff (all of the bad parts from todays rules combines with all of the bad art of yesterday's games...

On this point we'll probably never agree, since I can't really rationalize why one school of art is better than another. Some of the old art is truly terrible, particularly in OD&D. Other examples are not so bad.

Someone once requested from me a photocopy of the Succubus illustration from MM. Said he was gonna take it to a tattoo artist & have it done. Who knows how he'd even seen these obscure game publications, obsolete before he was born.

Busman wrote:...certainly don't want Outdoor Survival or Chainmail jousting..
spiced in with some of the worst rules of the past as well.

In my OD&D campaign, these worked particularly well. Not all my players were as keyed as I was to be playing slightly more primitive D&D rules variants. However when it came time for the party to trek across the wilderness, their interest picked up. OS is a fun game. So is Chainmail jousting, a simple, self-contained half-page of rules.

Busman wrote:Look at the 25th Anni. for something that works well. A good solid reprint of stuff from the past.

Exactly- that path has already been taken, & won't be repeated the same way. The titles selected for 25th Anni are the best; a second box of facsimile reprints would have to be second-best.

Busman wrote:Let those who didn't see the past get a chance to see it in new form. Let those who have the nostalgia relive it.

Not necessarily. The western genre existed for 20th century nostalgics born a hundred years too late. With fantasy gamers it's more like a thousand.

Monopoly retains a 30s style, but isn't a pure reprint of the first edition. D&D is no different. Dungeon Crawl Classics fill the game stores with neo/retro product; maybe WotC will give us a little more as well.

Busman
Prolific Collector

Posts: 260
Joined: Feb 25, 2003
Last Visit: Jan 10, 2021

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 1:53 am

sauromatian wrote:On this point we'll probably never agree, since I can't really rationalize why one school of art is better than another. Some of the old art is truly terrible, particularly in OD&D. Other examples are not so bad.

Someone once requested from me a photocopy of the Succubus illustration from MM. Said he was gonna take it to a tattoo artist & have it done. Who knows how he'd even seen these obscure game publications, obsolete before he was born.

Oh, I think you'll find we agree quite strongly, I suspect. I love the old stuff.

All due respect, but for me it goes down hill sometime around the end of Erol Otus' stuff. Easley I can appreciate as being great stuff, but it's always felt out of place on the cover of the interior works of the orange spine books. I know many people love Elmore's stuff, and there are certainly pieces of it which I like, but for the most part it leaves me flat. The work put out by WotC these days is often as bad anatomically as the original stuff it's just more spiced up with modern techniques.

For me, the pinnacle will always be Tramp.

sauromatian wrote:Monopoly retains a 30s style, but isn't a pure reprint of the first edition. D&D is no different. Dungeon Crawl Classics fill the game stores with neo/retro product; maybe WotC will give us a little more as well.

A fair point.

I disagree that 25th did all of the best stuff, I think a Gygax tribute box would be amazing: Chainmail, Whitebox, Lost Caverns of Tsojconth (not S4), B2 (yes, again, it's just that good/important), S1, T1, And the D-Series. Hard to say that would be of no interest. If they wanted to, they could do mini-book reprints of 1st print AD&D books with the Red, Orange and Yellow fly-leaf covers, etc. That's more than an armload of stuff showing the progression of the game while EGG was at the helm and a wide range of appeal.

Again, as you, it's a stuff I'd like to see set, I don't know how much interest there would be by the masses.

Xaxaxe
Sage Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 2884
Joined: Nov 04, 2004
Last Visit: May 09, 2020

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:48 am

Sorry, I just don't get it: why even bother with the mixing-and-matching? A blue book updated to 4e? Why? Who would such a product be aimed at?

Besides which, this sort of thing already exists in numerous forms. WotC has released free 3.5 updates to classics such as White Plume Mountain and Tomb of Horrors; they've also shoved a few "Expedition To" books out the door (which are decidedly not free) and I've never got the sense that those are selling like hotcakes. On my last game store visit, I saw a whole display of the 3.5 Demonweb Pits book that looked like it had an actual layer of dust on it.

WotC would be better off keeping things simple if they are looking to cash in on the nostalgia factor (or the Gygax factor): just re-release what's already in the archives. Boxed sets of modules would sell just fine ... a "Gygax's Greatest Hits" box would practically sell itself ... or how about a DVD that had like 10 modules in PDF form plus a bunch of extras (interviews, TSR history, etc.)?

ODD/1e and 4e share nothing but a name; they are completely different games that, by all indications, appeal to completely different crowds. Mixing them makes no sense at all.

sauromatian
Sage Collector

Posts: 2554
Joined: Jul 25, 2007
Last Visit: Jan 06, 2024
Location: Far Harad, Texas

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 6:06 pm

Xaxaxe wrote:Besides which, this sort of thing already exists in numerous forms. WotC has released free 3.5 updates to classics such as...

Your post would be easier to respond to if your thesis matched the reasons presented. D&D has been about variations on a common theme since 1977, including both the hot sellers & slow sellers.

They will never stop doing it this way. The only question is in the particulars- what will they dredge up from the past next?

Xaxaxe wrote:ODD/1e and 4e share nothing but a name; they are completely different games that, by all indications, appeal to completely different crowds. Mixing them makes no sense at all.

That IS the reason why. Fan reactions to 4e have so far been a yawn. What can WotC do to make it appeal to loyalists of earlier editions? A crossover product combining the oldest rules with the most recent could demonstrate that the editions aren't so dissimilar after all.

Xaxaxe wrote:just re-release what's already in the archives.

There are limits to how well this may work, especially if OD&D is involved. I found it out the hard way by first trying to get other people to play the old games. They would thumb through the poorly edited volumes, then abandon the effort in frustration & boredom.

Chopping up the paragraphs into a coherent, playable whole, mixed with the best illustrations into a xerox packet, made all the difference in my games & could work for WotC too.

Xaxaxe
Sage Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 2884
Joined: Nov 04, 2004
Last Visit: May 09, 2020

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 6:27 pm

No idea what you're saying; you've lost me. Although, as usual, you're doing a masterful job of confusing opinion with fact.

g026r
Verbose Collector

Posts: 1324
Joined: May 28, 2007
Last Visit: Aug 27, 2011
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 6:38 pm

sauromatian wrote:Fan reactions to 4e have so far been a yawn.

See, this doesn't match up with my personal experience. While most opinions I've encountered are either rabidly for it or rabidly against it, I've encountered more in-person "for"s than "against"s. (I find it more difficult to measure online opinions, as you tend to wind up with just those who really care one way or another shouting at each other. :roll:

Regardless, it seems people who play 3.5 do care one way or another about it. )

"Reader, Carthegena was of the mind, that unto thoſe Three Things, which the Ancients held Impoſſible, there ſhould be added this Fourth ; To find a Book Printed without Errata's."

Gnat the Beggar
Grandstanding Collector
JG Valuation Board
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 5029
Joined: Oct 11, 2004
Last Visit: Jan 16, 2017
Location: Texas

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 6:52 pm

Xaxaxe wrote:No idea what you're saying; you've lost me. Although, as usual, you're doing a masterful job of confusing opinion with fact.

lol

"Guys, I am starting to think Tegel Manor might be haunted..."
Stated by me as a PC during a run of Tegel Manor DMed by killjoy at NTRPGCon 2010

Charter Member of the ATM

Deadlord
Grandstanding Collector

Posts: 5885
Joined: Jun 30, 2003
Last Visit: Jul 31, 2026
Location: Cow Hampshire, US

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:41 pm

Saruman, I think what you might be missing is the fact that all 1E and 4E share is the D&D name. They are as different as apples and oranges. It would be impossible to mix the two; for starters, 4E is focused on leveling a character, whereas 1E is focused on adventuring and problem-solving.

If you hit a Rowsdower, you get to keep it.

Iluvatar
Active Collector

Posts: 26
Joined: Mar 22, 2008
Last Visit: Jan 13, 2011
Location: Kalundborg, Denmark

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:59 pm

Deadlord39 wrote:They are as different as apples and oranges.

More like strawberries and fetid feta cheese.... :wink:

M. Parthes
FINDNPLAY.COM

"PC's are like snowflakes; Ephemeral things destined to vanish very shortly after their creation."

deimos3428
Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3066
Joined: Jul 09, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 30, 2015

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:35 pm

sauromatian wrote:Fan reactions to 4e have so far been a yawn. What can WotC do to make it appeal to loyalists of earlier editions?

Assuming by earlier editions you mean pre-1990, the answer to your question is a resounding "sweet fuck all". 3E/3.5E enthusiasts, sure. 2E, maybe. If they're tried to reach an earlier audience than that, they'd be wasting their time and money.

sauromatian wrote:They would thumb through the poorly edited volumes, then abandon the effort in frustration & boredom.

One thing the early books are not is poorly edited. Poorly formatted, yes. Poorly spell-checked? Sure. Lousy art? Arguable. But compared to your average 3.5 work, they are miles ahead on content editing. The material is nearly all gold. And that's the bit that actually matters.

Last edited by deimos3428 on Thu May 29, 2008 3:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

sauromatian
Sage Collector

Posts: 2554
Joined: Jul 25, 2007
Last Visit: Jan 06, 2024
Location: Far Harad, Texas

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:53 pm

Deadlord39 wrote:what you might be missing is the fact that all 1E and 4E share is the D&D name.

Apparently I am; I haven't followed 4e announcements since I don't plan to buy into it. How is 4e about 'leveling a character' vs. 1e's 'adventuring and problem-solving?'

So far, I consider OD&D through 3.5 to be variations on the same mathematical functions, with certain +/-- values reversed between AD&D 2e & D&D 3e. Players Option [late 2e] is the only system I see as truly alien, & even it didn't wholly replace the core.

In any event, for many gamers the 70s/early 80s era of D&D was all about racking up the XP & little else, hence the term 'monty hall' for dungeons with random encounters & little else. I knew a guy in 1985 who thought his D&D handheld constituted the whole game in silicon form.

These players moved on to video games. Today it's hard to believe they even existed, but believe me they were ubiquitous.

deimos3428 wrote:Assumign by earlier editions you mean pre-1990, the answer to your question is a resounding "sweet fuck all". 3E/3.5E enthusiasts, sure. 2E, maybe. If they're tried to reach an earlier audience than that, they'd be wasting their time and money.

They once succeeded at the task. By 2000, most old gamers I knew had abandoned D&D for other systems long, long before. Somehow WotC convinced us to get excited over 3e.

deimos3428 wrote:One thing the early books are not is poorly edited.

Are we thinking of the same titles? If you mean Holmes 1977, then sure, that's why I think it would stand up well as a modern revision. If you mean OD&D, most old TSR, PHB or DMG, then very much no.

As instructional writing they are train wrecks. They don't differentiate fundamental mechanics over minor details, nor can they effectively address both novices & veterans in a given text.

In fact I don't think Gygax ever wanted the rules to be clear. His strategy for suspension-of-disbelief involved showing players a little info [often only their 6 attributes], while implying that a whole world of calculation was going on behind the DM screen.

Grug Greyskin
Prolific Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 632
Joined: Mar 17, 2008
Last Visit: Jul 26, 2026
Location: Evergreen, CO

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 12:37 am

sauromatian wrote:
Apparently I am; I haven't followed 4e announcements since I don't plan to buy into it. How is 4e about 'leveling a character' vs. 1e's 'adventuring and problem-solving?'

So far, I consider OD&D through 3.5 to be variations on the same mathematical functions, with certain +/-- values reversed between AD&D 2e & D&D 3e.

In any event, for many gamers the 70s/early 80s era of D&D was all about racking up the XP & little else, hence the term 'monty hall' for dungeons with random encounters & little else. I knew a guy in 1985 who thought his D&D handheld constituted the whole game in silicon form.

These players moved on to video games. Today it's hard to believe they even existed, but believe me they were once ubiquitous.

IMHO, the change to 3.0 provided many more options for customizing PCs. Not necessarily a bad thing, but the result is a push by players to create the ideal PC "build," there is even a guidebook specifically to address this. Players then become more interested in simply leveling, to the point that they will plan out their character's full development from level 1 to 20 before they even roll the dice once.

The comparison to video games is an apt one - many of today's players came from video games, and look for a similar experience on the table top. Hence 4e's abandonment of the 1e spell casting mechanic in favor of something with less restrictions, and the ease of healing between encounters that 4e offers (knowledge of both is gained only from reviews I have read, no personal experience here).

robertsconley
Prolific Collector

Posts: 205
Joined: Oct 25, 2006
Last Visit: Jun 16, 2026

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 8:54 am

As a programmer arguing about different D&D editions is like arguing about different programming languages and is about as fruitful.

The different editions of D&D are not the same nor they have the same feel. But they all share common elements that make them recognizably D&D. Whatever the current edition is, it's greatest impact is on new players entering the hobby.

Beyond that go with what you like.

As for 4th edition it appears to be a much more tactical game that lends itself to the same type of tweaking and management of characters as players do on MMORPGs. In effect this amounts to selecting X items from a list of powers and the list expands as you advance.

Currently it APPEARS that game is designed to make high level play as easily manageable as low level play. It appears that the underlying class abilities and feats are vastly different in feel from D&D 3.0 thus giving rise to a lot of negative comments from current fans. Fans of earlier editions look at the announcements, chuckle and then go back to playing their edition.

Rules aside WoTC appears to having manpower issues causing projects outside of the main rules like Dragon, Dungeon, the website, the Game System License to be massively delayed. This appears to increase negative perception of the rules.

WoTC is making virtual tabletop play a part of the experience of the new rules. Virtual Tabletops is rapidly becoming an important part of the hobby as it allows groups to meet and play that otherwise couldn't. Virtual Tabletop does a damn good job of replicating sitting around table. Of course it isn't the same but when there are no alternatives it is way better than something like Neverwinter Nights or a MMORPG.

I highly recommend that whenever possible advocate that older editions be supported on whatever software WoTC comes up with.

Rob Conley

deimos3428
Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3066
Joined: Jul 09, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 30, 2015

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 9:38 am

sauromatian wrote:As instructional writing they are train wrecks. They don't differentiate fundamental mechanics over minor details, nor can they effectively address both novices & veterans in a given text.

They don't hand-hold you, sure. Perhaps parts of them are confusing. They are still edited well content-wise. Unlike more recent versions, there are few if any half-baked ideas that made it to print. To me, "edited well" doesn't mean applying pretty colors or having few typos, or even necessarily being perfectly clear. It means that the content is filtered from a quality perspective. So maybe we just have different definitions of "edited well".

Regarding "converting" old-school players, that's simply not going to happen. Those that are willing or able to shift to another edition have already done so. There might be some initial interest in 4E, but that will subside rather quickly when the product is released. Feel free to prove me wrong, WotC.

FormCritic
Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6720
Joined: Jul 16, 2005
Last Visit: Sep 30, 2022

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 10:43 am

How do we know that 4th edition is about "leveling a character?"

3.5 certainly is.

I have come to the conclusion that those who criticized 3rd edition as a tabletop video game are not far off. Having recently GM'd the game at higher levels....one can almost hear blooop! boing! tweet! bing bing bing! sounding as the characters work their combat stacks.

However...AD&D was less about rules stacks (until Unearthed Arcana and Oriental Adventures) but it was also about leveling up. I can only conclude that either some people played in a much more free-form hippy style or people have blurry memories of the old days.

I am most interested in the idea that 4th edition will "scale" so that the "sweet spot" will go all the way to high level. How can this be?

As for differences between rules sets...mostly cosmetic. Under the flashy decals and corporate sponsor logos, the game has always been about the essential math of the d20. 1 is 5%. +1 is +5%. Hit points accumulate and they keep you from dying....while monster hit points degrade quite rapidly. The engine from my 1977 Cadilac might be pulled out and stuck in a different model car, but it is still the same engine.

What changed between editions was the wide range of player options, the solving of all combat issues with minute levels of rules lawyering (all interconnected to an astonishing level) and the enormous complexity of monster statistics.

"But I have watched the dragons come, fire-eyed, across the world."

The Acaeum Forums • Collecting General

Page 6 of 26 • 1 2 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 24 25 26