|
Post by Drozgul on Dec 20, 2009 21:57:39 GMT -5
If you want a system that has nothing to even offer, with so little flavor that you can paint the whole world any which way and just happen to have some steel and magic...well then play ANYTHING, and throw the book away...Call it "Vanilla".
Funny how as many times as I've mentioned doing this in the past I get a negative response. Oh well.
Seriously, the old systems without house ruled add-ons, and write-ins are terribly limited. I realize anyone has the right to think outside that "box", but then they should realize that this simple "right" was never taken away.
New editions describe more, because they want to, and because they can. (Same reason you don't want them to, because you, as a player can.) They don't do it because they're holding your hand and forcing your brain to wash into their zone of alternate reality. The previous argument makes it sound like a short paragraph on paper can disallow for any imaginative entry, and creative independence. And we all know that's not true. If a player will hold their ground to say that 4E limits you, the player is only limiting themselves.
(I have edited this response in order to make my argument stick, while omitting anything that I felt was offensive or personal. The rest stands as a general offense to my prior statements, as well as defense to any opposing statements.)
|
|
rlandis
Journeyman
FOR THE EMPIRE!
Posts: 224
|
Post by rlandis on Dec 21, 2009 14:08:15 GMT -5
I can tell my last post was not taken as a joke. . . It was meant as a joke, which you seemed to have taken as a serious comment.
I enjoy a GOOD system. As stated, I love 3.5, Warhammer, burning wheel, and wod. . .
4'th is just a no bueno for me.
Now drozgul, I have remained civil and held a humor in this thread.
I commend you for defending 4'th ed, but now you are crossing the line. You are now attacking a player(Forum) member, rather then a system or defending the system. We are here to attack and defend 4'th, sharing personal experiences and the such. I am thick skinned, thankfully and I can roll such comments away. But do not turn this into your own personal venting board to rant and rave about players and your dislike for their opinions. That is a sure fired way to discourage player's from posting their opinions, on forums we call this "Flaming" or "trolling". Save your comments for the game, not the player. If you have a problem with my opinion, please debate it with me. We have handled such debates in a civil matter before without insults.
Right now, your attacks against a player from across a forum board, truly "Seriously sadden me." As it shows you have gone down in level in your quality of debate.
Now please, this a forum where you can express your opinion about GAMES, a cute insult or a jab here and there is fine. BUT A FULL post where the only objective is to debase and harass ANY forum member, is against OUR rules.
Now, Fenix and I have a thread where we jab at each other, but it is all IN JEST AND OF GOOD HUMOR. Everything said there is with a smile or a sarcastic chuckle. Your post, did not hold this quality.
Now please, defend 4'th ed, attack 4'eth, attack my opinions on 4'eth, but do not directly attack ME. Saying "I disagree with - blah-de-blah" and then stating your own opinion is a CIVIL way to insult or debate an OPINION.
Now, on a different note. As I have said before. I am against the style of "none combat experiance" the game has to offer. I agree, I let myself limit my imagination for the game, but with good reason. The game itself, is too left or right, up or down. I enjoy a good game with gray area, for that is when the best story and plot take place. I enjoy a good useless skill just so it may add flavor to the Roleplay. In 4'th, they tried to make everything perfect and balanced to be a "kick-ass build" to make the "best char." I hate hand holding, and I feel 4'th tried to suck in kids. The best way, is to give them a strong structure that limits ones imagination and forces them down a liniar line.
|
|
|
Post by Drozgul on Dec 21, 2009 14:31:00 GMT -5
No, I understood it was supposed as a joke. But it still supports everything you've mentioned about 4E so far. You don't want the flavor descriptors because you want to make your own action. But they have always been an example. You say you like Warhammer (among some really great game qualities that you rarely mention) because it states something like: Describe the most horribly terrible death you can imagine. And then you make it sound like that doesn't apply to another system. What? So the really terrible triple 20 crit/instant kill rule would not impose an insanely horrific death? Just because the text doesn't actually TELL you that in its own words? I do believe that makes your statement a wee bit hypocritical.
Additionally, I stopped trying to convince you to actually play 4E after my very first post supporting it. I just wish you had an argument against it that was worth posting against all the long-winded support we have provided.
To say "I eat what I like" is suitable once. You stated that, and then again, and then again...etc. If I say a suit is blue and in the same light you swear that its black, there's no changing your mind, unless I can actually get you to read the tag, but you still see what you see. That's just you, and it always has been. You cannot be convinced of anyone else's point of view but your own. That's fine, I know I can be just as stubborn. I am simply pointing out that your empty retorts make no argument that 3.5 (or any other version for that matter) is actually any better...or for that matter any worse, other than the "MMO" opinion you have about it.
An opinion is fine. But I suppose to me if feels as though I had a chance to have a clever debate against some worthy comers. And yet you have nothing of note, with any fact backing to support it, to argue your point with. Usually that's MY weak point. I'm just a little disappointed is all.
I will have to declare Ryan the victor here. (I of course take a small chunk of credit for most words on the subject if nothing else.) And honestly I am tempted to argue in favor of 3.5 just to see if I CAN manage to pull anything at all...but I'm pretty sure the system's weakest points have already been pointed out by Mr. Rock.
Limited class selection (for now), grappling, the handling of spell use...oh and that the upcoming dual-classing may not be quite as "multi-class" as some would like. That's pretty much it.
|
|
rlandis
Journeyman
FOR THE EMPIRE!
Posts: 224
|
Post by rlandis on Dec 21, 2009 19:17:29 GMT -5
I stated this earlier in another post, that I am feeling like a Broken record. I can continue to reply to further comments about why I dislike 4'th but I'd feel like a broken record so I shall stop. I'm not one to give into peer pressure. I don't give a $h*t if the WHOLE WORLD loves this game. I don't, so I shall hold onto that until I change my mind. I'm not ganna just roll over and go "Oh, your right! I LOVE 4'th! My bad! I'm sorry guys! Lets have group sex after a thrilling game of 4'th ed!" I have told you that I DO NOT like 4'th. I have my reasons, and your not ganna make me question my feelings towards something. I HAVE YET to tell anyone to not play 4'th. I have NEVER told anyone to burn their books and stop playing. I have a shitty taste in games, you have a shitty taste in movies. Just like games and movies, its all about OPINION! In my OPINION, my God given Opinion that is my RIGHT to have is, I do not like 4'th. In you opinion, you may find it to be the best god damn thing since sliced bread and root beer. Either way, we are both wrong because it is "OPINIONS." We are here to debate 4'th ed, attack and defend it, NOT ATTACK AND DEFEND EACH OTHER. The idea begind a debate is to attack and defend a "thing" or "idea" not to insult the debater. Now can we get this damn thread back onto 4'th ed. Or are you ganna keep flameing and trolling me personally? If you want to attack me, go to the "raw, raw fight the power" thread.
|
|
rlandis
Journeyman
FOR THE EMPIRE!
Posts: 224
|
Post by rlandis on Dec 21, 2009 20:02:29 GMT -5
Now, my major beef with 4'th is its old quality. I loved the past where it left alot "blank" it left alot for personal flavor and the Dm's flavor to take more affect.
To me, 4'th feels very clean and gives off this MMO/hospital feel. 3.5 gave me a grittier rougher feel. I liked how my char's could barely do $h*t first 1-5, it made us use our heads more, less "lets charge in and blow all of our cooldowns! We will win!"
To me, the abilities that low level char's get ruin the game for me a bit as they can run up and smash just about anything. Kobolds aren't even threatening, wooo hard to hit, with only 1 hp. . . I'm not saying they are the most dangerous creature in the world, but in 3.5 they atleast had a kick to them.
Now, why I love WoD is, it gave a Skeleton of information for mechanics, but a $h*t load of fluff and lore. Warhammer, same story. 4'th, feels the opposite. I feel they kicked Rpers in the mouth and gave Math-mechanics the boost.
To me, 4'th has the feel of "Follow the Rules as they are written on the book, or piss off and play a different system." I got rubbed into the direction that 4'th is trying to destroy house rules and make everything into nice-neat little rows.
|
|
|
Post by Drozgul on Dec 22, 2009 0:27:13 GMT -5
This thread was never put up to convince anyone to play, or for that matter not to play any system. I believe I even stated that I am in no way trying to get you or anyone else back to the table to play this particular version. I myself am even opposed to playing this system as it stands.
However, in a debate, one picks a side, and defends it for all its worth. I may have dribbled over the line a little here and there with my "personal criticism crayons" when I know this thread is meant to be clinical, so I will put them away.
That being said, the rules, rewrites, classes, feats, spells, and other things that make the game what it is were more than well backed for Ryan's side of the argument, and I knew from the start, that by fact and not opinion, that 4E is the stronger case. It is sound, crisp, simple, fluid, and usable with little disinclination.
4th edition is not, and probably will not be a system I choose to play myself, until I am satisfied with the amount of usable material at my disposal, which thus far has not been reached. I still support the argument that 4E is the "better" version however, BECAUSE it caters to a younger crowd (which is how you sell a hobby game) and will continue to bring in new players, which honestly 3.5 no longer stands a chance of doing for anyone who has not yet played any version of Dungeons & Dragons. This last statement of course is my opinion, but strongly supported by fact that the make of the product is simply more appealing to a new player. Not only is it easy to digest, its also easier to play.
Reference: World of Warcraft. In the beginning, it was meaty, difficult, broad, and choppy. The way you and I both preferred it, yes. However, it is now a "better" product because it caters to a larger audience. Opinion aside, its true. The numbers prove this. I specifically used an MMO to support your personal view on the topic.
However, while I apologize for being opinionated, but only to the extent where it was seen as a "public insult", I hold my ground on the better product. And will again state that not only did I not ask you to play the game again, it is certain now that I never will.
I do not now, nor do I ever wish anyone to play a game that does not agree with their taste in games, on any level, personal or otherwise. I have made a solid effort not to be repetitive if possible to make my arguments clear, and to support 4E for its ability to make a product that could be better sold and played from here further.
In fact, its sales quality was honestly the first...and I do mean the VERY first thing I came to despise about it. D&D 3E was released in 2000. That was just TEN years ago. Only to be revised near immediately in 2003. Barely three years and it was earmarked for an errata overhaul to become what we now know as 3.5 edition! As though that wasn't enough, tens upon tens of publications are being released left and right, both official, and third party products, which sold to the masses and raked in a fortune for several gaming companies and presses. Only as we settled in, and got comfortable with our new and greatly expanded (and expanding still at the time) 3.5, does Wizards of the Coast swoop down on a "New Deal" and decides only two years later (2005) to ALREADY begin to create another new edition that will not play well with its predecessor, or be compatible in any way besides the name of the product and a few familiarities like character "build types". (Even though as Ryan suggested, it doesn't throw away all the old material, but without an extensive and maybe exhaustive rewrite, it could certainly feel that way.)
This leads us to Gen Con 2007...where the ugly rumor became truth. 4th Edition Dungeons and Dragons was here, and will be ready to play by the summer of the following year. 3.5 barely even had time, so if anyone had their chance with it, (which we did, and we made many great and not so great games in this short time frame, our age group being its perfect target audience) they were being slapped in the face with something new. Again. Already.
MMO setup? Only once they actually wrote it down that way was it said that way by the current players of the time. 4E offered its "Leaders, Controllers, Healers, Damage Dealers, and Defenders" to us, because it was already familiar not only at the computer, but also at the table. The game was always "Tanks, Skill Monkeys, Glass Cannons, Crowd Control, Sneaks, and Utility" wasn't it? Yeah, you bet your ass it was. But until Wizards wrote it, no one was saying it that way. Or those of us who already were for years, (thank you Phil for helping me make this point) knew that new, was just a facelift. Even if it was way too soon.
It was a big problem to make a switch. Why'd they do it? Why not? MMO's are sweeping the globe, and making a fortune, any good company in business knows how to make its money, it is to bandwagon until a new fresh idea sweeps the old one. So, even with boycotts from players like myself, it IS the new D&D, and it IS a superior product. That IS opinion aside. And what's more, they didn't stop at the table, they wanted the game to be playable online with a subscription as well, not so much to copy the "mainstream" of games now, but to get more money, and make it convenient, albeit expensive, to play with friends who no longer needed a ride to Jimmy's house to play. I would suggest they ride their bike there, but hey, who am I kidding? Kids barely ride bikes, walk, or even leave their rooms much anymore to have fun...they're LAZY. But Wizards still wanted their money all the same. So they went about it all the right way, and they're getting it. Sadly, the promises made by the company for online fluid game play, have yet to come to full fruition, with a standard character generator available, but no monsters or dungeons yet. Why is it taking so long? Haven't they been working on this now for 5 YEARS?
I do still find it limited in material available. The number of playable and choosable goodies are increasing as the books are spat onto retail shelves though, and so it is likely a matter of time before I pick up and play again. There are still enough players willing to play the old version, sure. No problem. But parties I've come to enjoy playing D&D with the most have moved forward, and soon then so shall I.
Let me be the broken record this time. I'm not asking you or anyone else to join, to play, to follow suit, or to make arrangements, or compromises during this particular thread (that will have its place after our first public meeting). I don't like to ask anyone to do that. Not for a game, not for anything really. Hell, its just a game. But I picked my side, I stuck to it, and I believe with everything in me, that as much I I started off absolutely hating 4th Edition D&D, that I have simply been away from my alma mater of gaming (so to speak) for far too long. D&D is in my blood now somewhere, much like any of your favorite systems are to you. So in any edition, I can, have, and will play it. Its where I started, where a lot of players have. Or on a system inspired by it, most likely.
(Good news is, at least this post was at minimum 51% argument for the game, and that was my goal, as majority stock is enough usually these days.) Limitations lie within the individual, and the creative spirit that brought our beloved games as far as they have also lie within the individual. We as individuals make an effort, often a consolidated effort, often even in a group setting, to make changes to the things that we find limiting, in order to better enrich the time shared among one another. It is to "see what we can do", and not to constantly strike down and discuss only what we cannot do. That wouldn't be much fun, or a constructive use of time at all.
So for those of you who ARE willing, ready and able to play the latest edition of this game. I challenge you to not only find the faults in the game you dislike, but work with your group and more importantly your GM, to revise the system with house rules, to allow all the imaginative fiber you have come to life in your next game. Want an option? Write it, make it work, play it. This bottom line is the very fabric of the game we love, and to forget that is to forget that we are innovators of our own mind, our own creativity, and without that we will have forgotten what the game was created for in the first place. Fun.
|
|
|
Post by rjrock85 on Dec 22, 2009 6:50:45 GMT -5
Droz, you had me worried there for a second, creeping very close to Trolldom. However, you've turned it around, and made a very good "speech". Inspiring, gets the point across...well done.
I, personally, can't wait to see a 4E game on the table. One that does it justice, and doesn't lose sight of the key ingredient of any game...Fun.
As you've noticed, I have been rather quiet since my last post. Mainly because it is most futile to argue points with opinion...it doesn't get anywhere, and debates aren't won that way. They are won with facts. I've argued my points with facts, and await facts from the opposition to dispute. Until then, I will keep reading this thread because, while opinions don't really earn any points, its nice to see opinions being given freely...even if they fire me up.
|
|
|
Post by roborob on Dec 25, 2009 1:00:48 GMT -5
ok i have to disagree about the kobolds are not a threat. in 4E the mobs have a larger range of power. you can add i think 5 levels to any enemy or remove for that matter. and the 1hp thing is a minion thing not a kobold thing. it says minions all have 1 hp and are for cannon fodder. they are specifically for rushing hordes of baddies at a party. there are templates on how to use the monster classes. a group of 5 minions, a controller and a striker is one encounter set. it is all laid out. that is something i did kinda like cause 3.5 is like oh i want them to fight goblins... dang now they are too high to use kobolds or skellies unless i choose another type or just make tons of character sheets and give them player classes. before i wasn't trying to say 4E is all bad i was saying it needs work. there is good and bad. i like 3.5 cause most of the kinks are worked out and there is alot of alternate rules.
|
|
|
Post by labael on Dec 31, 2009 8:48:42 GMT -5
All right I say put up or shut up to you 4e lovers. Put a game on the table. Make it fun. Place roleplay into. . .you bloody well better! And Potter place down your Vanilla world game. We have a club now. There are more people here than before. There were ten people at the club meeting. Groups of five are the proper amount of players for most games. A vanilla world can be played with 2 people without problem. Much like how you and Jim would Brian.
Stop bitching about your differing ideas and do something! So what if one person doesn't want to play a system. We actually have the numbers to do a lot. Ya'all a bunch of old women!!
Bloody wankers!! Ach!! (had to get my angry dwarf on)
|
|
|
Post by labael on Dec 31, 2009 8:51:53 GMT -5
3.5 equals windows xp
4E equals Windows Vista. . .
Next year 4.5 equals Windows 7, hey look they fixed it and made all my old books obsolete!
|
|
Fenix
Journeyman
Who in the hell do you think I am?
Posts: 162
|
Post by Fenix on Dec 31, 2009 15:24:40 GMT -5
Don't make Bael angry, you won't like him when he's angry.
|
|
|
Post by rjrock85 on Jan 1, 2010 2:46:52 GMT -5
I'd put a 4e game on the table, Bael, but there are too many damned games going on right now or will be in the near future. I want badly to play 4e without someone DMing it to try to prove that it sucks *cough* *cough* ahem.
But wait, 2nd edition was XP...and 3.0 was Vista and 3.5 is 7 making all the old books "obsolete". This shit happens every time a new edition of anything comes out..."Well the Old Ways were better, no matter what you say or how reasoned your arguments are...I'm going to continue farming by hand."
I'm done for now.
|
|
|
Post by labael on Jan 1, 2010 10:46:57 GMT -5
I will admit that, I had DMed 4e to make a point. Which was wrong in hindsight. I was mostly annoyed that you, rock, wouldn't play unless the game was 4.0. I should have continued on with my original game plan and just had fun and just had tailored a game to 4E when I was good and ready.
I would also like to recant my statement on episodic games. I am more than willing to play as a player in them. My annoyance at the Old World of Darkness end of the world time line. Annoyance is even too strong of a word. Much like the debate on D&D, I had gotten too caught up in fight rather than my own feelings on the subject.
And so I am taking myself out of this fight. As I said I'm willing to be a player. I'm tired of the D&D civil war. DM what you want to DM. "If you make it, they will come!" I've been admittedly iching to play a dwarven shaman. 4E has the best game mechanics to combo my two favorite things, shamanism and dwarves.
I'm done hating. I still say put up or shut up. There are too many damn games going? Well guess you have prioritized. . .
|
|
rlandis
Journeyman
FOR THE EMPIRE!
Posts: 224
|
Post by rlandis on Jan 1, 2010 13:06:01 GMT -5
Too many games. Bah.
Theres a WoD game going (Tony's) Theres a WoD gameing Starting (Once a month, yours) A Warhammer game Starting (Mine) A Paused Burning Wheel (Yours)
And the Total War Warhammer is still floating in the air till we have a system in place. (That could take months)
Brians WoD game ended, did it not? I don't know if hes comeing out with a new one.
Alex is running a Test Giest, I don't know if that has kicked off yet.
Not really much going on.
|
|
|
Post by rjrock85 on Jan 1, 2010 14:32:31 GMT -5
My priorities: first in first out. The queue is full, so until a space opens up in the queue, I will not launch a 4E game. It is on my to do list though...most likely after either the Burning Wheel game ends or my WoD game is over. Oh and Brian's WoD game is ongoing. Not much going on at all
|
|