Tuesday, February 7, 2012

Building a New Dungeons & Dragons

AKA “Three Pillars My Ass”

This probably won’t seem like an incredibly constructive post. Hell, maybe it’s not. But I’m not in a bad mood or anything (yet, that is…sometimes when I start typing I get all worked up, ya’ know?). But to start with anyway, I’m feeling cool as a cucumber.

What the F, Wizards of the Coast? I mean, really.

You know, all those guys on the WotC design team…Monte Cook, Mike Mearls, whoever…you know, all of ‘em have a much better design “pedigree” than myself. I mean, measured simply by real hard numbers: they’ve sold a ton more product and been paid a ton more money for their game design work. And, yeah, perhaps if I had ownership of the intellectual property of our niche industry AND the marketing force of a Hasbro corporation I might be able to pull off a similar feat, but I don’t and I haven’t and I accept I'm just a little tiny voice yelling in the darkness of the internet.

Yep, I accept it. However, for my own amusement and my readers’ entertainment, I’ll try to yell just a tiny bit louder.

Okay, so this “three pillars” thang. I spent some of today (and off and on the last week or so) running searches on the internet to try to get it, you know, hammered down what exactly the WotC folks are talking about. I mean, what I’d heard was something like this transcript of “charting the course of the new edition.”

The first place I actually saw it mentioned was at Geek’s Dream Girl here., where e wrote the following:
3 Pillars of D&D

Mike mentioned that they see the three pillars of D&D as Roleplay/Interaction, Combat, and Exploration. That covers about 90% of what goes on in D&D, minus the rules lawyering (that last one was pointed out by someone during Q&A at the end). They think a lot about how they can incorporate all the things that people want to do at the table, without making a rule for everything.

Monte recognized that some PCs will be good at exploration and not so good at combat, and vice versa. But it’s important to have a firm role for each class. If you have a player who just wants to kick ass, you can help that person create that PC.

Continuing on the classes discussion, Mike added that you can be a stabby rogue (more combat-heavy) or a sneaky rogue (more exploration heavy). Monte added that bards can still kick ass.
Hmmm…interaction (“roleplay”), combat, and exploration covers “about 90% of what goes on in D&D” and appears to be the focus of the designers as the presumed foundation of the game. Specifically with regard to characters being balanced against each other. Because if that accounts for 90% of game play, then the most important thing is to account for that in the design of the game, right? And we don’t want one character type to hog the spotlight all the time, yeah?

*sigh*

Anyway, before I jumped to any conclusions based on 2nd (or 3rd) hand hearsay, I figured I really wanted more info on this whole “Three Pillars” concept. I finally found something more in an article posted to WotC’s own site answering some dude’s question.

[it’s dated 2/7/12, though my calendar still says it’s 2/6…not quite sure what that’s all about]

Here’s the link; I’ll quote it in its entirety:
Q: I frequently have games when throughout the entire session we go without any combat whatsoever. What can I expect from the new edition in regards to this style of play?

A: Over the course of the last year, we've distilled the essential experiences of D&D down into three general categories: exploration, roleplaying, and combat. We believe these form the three main pillars of gameplay in D&D, and, while broad, they can help guide our design.

A part of the design philosophy going forward is that each of those three elements contains some very specific things that contribute to the game and culture that is Dungeons & Dragons. However, we also know that individual DMs, players, and gaming groups might favor one of those elements over another; of course, sometimes they might favor one element over the others in one session, and then completely reverse that preference in the next. The goal, then, is to support all three of those elements in the design of the game in such a way that the individual gaming group can choose its focus and have a satisfying game experience. This doesn't mean we necessarily need the same amount of game mechanics supporting each; obviously, combat has tended more toward detail and more rules support, and that may well be true going forward, but we also want to make sure we're paying a similar amount of attention to the other two experiences.

This philosophy is something we want to extend beyond just character design; it should affect adventure design, monster design, setting design, and every other aspect of the game. Our goal is to make it so that you make choices for your character that speak to your preferred play style, and that it's OK to do so even if other members of your party make choices pointing toward a different play style. Adventuring demands a certain amount of competence in all three areas of the game, but when you customize your character you might push yourself more in one direction or another.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. The emphasis added to that last sentence is mine, and it’s there ‘cause I want to draw attention to it.

How does one customize your character to push yourself more in the direction of “role-playing?” I can understand what is meant by combat and I can kind of figure what they mean by “exploration” (exploring the game world, setting, or adventure, right? Something like that?). But when I think of “role-playing” I can only think up a couple-three definitions to the term, and none of ‘em can be customized in the character creation process:

  • role-playing as acting (i.e. “playing a role”), something like talking in an accent or hamming for one’s fellow tables
  • role-playing as tactical role in the party (for example, “she’s the tank, he’s the fire support”)…but this would be covered under combat specifically and is generally not the "RP" one thinks of in an RPG.
  • role-playing by JB’s definition:
When the objective of the player matches the objective of the character.

[there is a series of posts, starting HERE, that explains this more clearly as well as explaining it’s importance to the RPG hobby]

So what then, exactly, is it that the WotC folks define as "role-playing?" What is it you can do during the chargen process to increase the value of this third “pillar” of the Dungeons & Dragons game?

Actually, both those questions are rhetorical…I neither want nor need answers to them because the whole idea that the “essential experiences of D&D,” that the “three main pillars of gameplay [sic]” can be categorized as role-play, exploration, and combat is totally bogus.

As in bullshit.

Or let me put it in a slightly different way: with all due respect to the WotC brain trust, maybe those things are the three pillars of game play in YOUR campaign, but that is certainly not what drives mine, and if attending to them (and the importance of the thre in character design) is how you’re going about Building A Better D&D, then I think you’re starting off under a way faulty premise.

You really think that this is what keeps people coming back to D&D? “Role-play, exploration, combat?” That’s totally f’ing ridiculous. I mean, how do those “three pillars” motivate the DM? What makes him (or her) want to break brain and put together kick-ass sessions?

[not that the DM always succeeds in doing so…]

If the three things that form the essential D&D experience are “role-play, exploration, and combat” and this is your focus, then you are leaving the DM out of the loop. And you are (once again) probably going to end up doing a disservice to the game (and pissing people off).

I’m not saying the whole “modular approach” thing is a terrible idea (though I’m not sure it’s a terribly good one). I’m saying whatever it is you’re making is being built on a dumb-dumb foundation. You all are emphasizing the importance of the wrong things based on a faulty premise.

Sure. That's just one man's opinion (and one small, lone voice...yes, I get it). But I would be remiss if I didn't say something. Not because it will necessarily influence anyone, but because the on-going hobby of role-playing (and the on-going health of Dungeons & Dragons) is, at some level, important to me. And unlike other gamers, I'm not just content to let it go to hell in a hand basket while I play my own game off in the corner.

Well...maybe I am content to do so, but that would be irresponsible of me.
; )

Tell you what: how about if I give you the REAL three pillars on which D&D is based. Three things that ARE essential to the game play of D&D, three things that have kept players coming back over the years, without which the game suffers and stagnates. Heck, I’ll even bother to explain ‘em for you (though I’ll have to wait till tomorrow, ‘cause this post is already getting long). Want ‘em? Okay, here they are:

Challenge
Reward
Escape


These are the truly essential components of D&D game play, and ought to be the focus of the WotC design team. If you're not using those as your foundation, then...well to end this post on a constructive note, let's just say: make these the emphasis and foundation of your design process and you'll get your "unifying Dungeons & Dragons game."

More to follow on this subject.

[sorry, had to post it in the morning after all...]

30 comments:

  1. My turn. What the hell does "Escape" mean?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Seems to me that "Roleplay" means social interaction with NPCs and perhaps other PCs. Characters with lots of Charisma and social skills, either as players or characters. The guys that operate as the "face" of the party.

    WotC's Three Pillars pretty much match what goes on at my game table. Your list covers the "adventure" part of the game but misses a few things - role playing for the fun of it, exploration just to see what's on the other side of the river, etc

    ReplyDelete
  3. I am willing to give Cook and Mearls the benefit of the doubt here. It is not that had better budgets and better marketing, they both have an impressive number of books to their credits (80+ for Mearls-most before he ever went to WotC, 110+ for Cook, not counting magazine articles for both), so they have the street cred in my mind.

    I don't see these "Three Pillars" as bad places to start. In fact your three can be encapsulated in their three. Just a different point of view.

    The issue is that every DM is going to make the game into what they want. Even we we only had one edition of D&D worked out from design ideals that were no more lofty than "lets have fun" we had divergent points of view and opinions on what the game should be.

    What we have now is the expectation that a company will create a game to cater to all our personal wants and desires. I don't want that. I want them to make a good game and then *I'll* change what I want to what I want.

    Give me a core, a foundation to work from. I can build the rest. So far, the idea of D&D 5 is an intriguing one.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The only thing I can say id WotC three pillars seemed to be based on "Player Entitlement".

    ERIC!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Looking forward to the detailed descriptions of your three pillars!

    ReplyDelete
  6. I just wrote a post addressing the importance of setting, and three of the FOUR things I included were, effectively, the three things you ended up with here. So we're on the same page.

    But I have to wonder, how many times does it have to be said? How many ways does it have to be said? Who gives a rat's ass what these guys think the game of D&D is about? I realize that a lot of people want to keep giving them the benefit of the doubt, but these doofus morons at WOTC are so far from the cutting edge of this game as to put them off the design board entirely. This is increasingly evident from every damn thing they say. Especially since everything they say is designed to SELL, not to improve the game.

    When do we stop bothering to notice they exist?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Alexis. Maybe because I still find the games they produce fun. I love my old school games, I love my games from Eden Studios and I still enjoy playing D&D3, D&D4 and hopefully D&D5.

    Giving money to company that does what you want them to do is not a bad thing.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Um, Tim.

    You already have the games. We all have the games. The games are great. They've been great for 40+ years.

    Why do these johnny-come-latelys matter?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Then why buy anything at all? I like new games. I like to write them, I like to play them, I like to buy them too. I can't always support this hobby with contributions, but I can support it with my dollars.

    And let's be honest, Cook and Mearls may be a lot things, but "johnny come latelys" they are not. Do they have more experience than me? Maybe, maybe not, but they do have different experiences and those are nice to see.

    If I was always content with what I had, I never would have left D&D in the 90s and never discovered C.J. Carella's WitchCraft RPG, which I feel is one of the best RPGs ever written. I then never would have worked on Buffy, never wrote Ghosts of Albion or any of the 100s of things I have written for dozens of games. I don't like to be static. I like to experience the new.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This is just what I mean. This weird insistence that corporate stooges somehow represent the identity of the hobby. This weird insistence that WOTC produces "quality" material, when well over half the community is perfectly aware that they do not. It is as though we're so afraid for the survival of the game, we must believe that Overlords of Great Wisdom protect it.

    Tim, my man, my fellow, for whom I have no ill feelings ... I haven't bought anything from a D&D vendor in 27 years. I don't intend to buy anything, ever again. I am not alone. I am very much not alone. Can you imagine how it must look to people like me, to hear you arguing that there are things to buy? You sound like a salesman.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Tim and Alexis: I think I understand you both. I fall into the Alexis camp when it comes to what I'll buy. I likely won't buy ANYthing that WOTC puts out, because I enjoy building and running my own games from the stuff I already have and the stuff I think up. All the same, I don't think you can fault someone who prefers constant change and new ideas from people other than themselves. If that person wants to buy products from a 'big company' like WotC, that's great. If they want to buy it from indie developers, that's also great. If they want to get it by just sharing ideas with fellow gamers. That's great. I don't think that Timothy is saying that 'only big companies' can come up with the good stuff- just that he happens to LIKE what they're coming up with. Nothing wrong with that.

    And for that matter, I don't think there is anything wrong with trying to sell a product. It's what the capitalist system is based on. And though I have a lot of problems with that system, it has still given me an awful lot in my life. The market is the big equalizer in this case. If they put out a good product- one that people (though perhaps not everyone) like. Then it will sell. If not, then it won't. I don't begrudge WotC the right to try to make a living just because I personally don't like what they're producing. Yeah, it kind of sucks that they own a piece of my youth (represented in the D&D game), but I'm a Star Wars fan, too. And we're used to seeing our childhood memories err.. 'improved upon'. That's just the way things are, and for me personally it just means that I have to do it myself when it comes to gaming. But not everyone is like that. And there isn't anything wrong with it, in my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I appreciate that, rologutwein, But JB has taken the time to write this post that clearly shows that WOTC, as always, has its head up its own butt, and I'm wondering why this hobby - unlike every other hobby on the planet - can't separate itself from its own commercialism.

    And yes, indeed I know all about the wonderful capitalistic system. Isn't that the same one that has recently purchased (and outsourced) your government?

    ReplyDelete
  13. What hope did we have when they brought in Monte, Bruce Cordell, etc.? This is essentially the brain trust behind 3.X minus Williams and Tweet. Obviously, they saw 0E & 1E as being "problematic" and so they nuked 2E and gave us 3.X which was in fact the first step of slicing the community into 3 parts.

    All of this 3 Pillars nonsense reminds me of grad school and boils down to a lot of talk by folks who are desperately trying to make themselves appear to be deeply intellectual and contemplative. Not only does the resultant fallacy completely ignore the role of the DM (as JB points out), but more importantly it IGNORES the crunch/tweaking outside of actual game time that occupies much of the modern day player's experience as they "customize" their perfect build. The design team has little hope of bringing OSR fans back into the Big Tent, but they sure as Hell better get the crunch-tweaking right or they'll never get the lost sheep back from Paizo.

    Looking forward to part 2 of this article JB.

    ReplyDelete
  14. @ Everyone:

    You guys. I tell ya', you really do make me smile. ALL of you.
    : )

    @ Alexis (specifically): my "pillars," while similar to your "player rights" (I believe Latitude is the post to which you're referring? If not, tell me) are a little different concept than what you're speaking about. You'll see what I mean shortly.

    Posts to start going up tomorrow, folks. Maybe later this afternoon.
    ; )

    ReplyDelete
  15. Hey 'Lexis, it's Paul!

    *sniff sniff* Is that someone hating on the US that I detect? Too bad we can't all just get along, eh?

    Funnily enough, I'm mostly with my Canadian friend on the "Who cares what WotC does?" front. But then again, I can see where the "But WotC owns the brand and we don't want them to screw it up any more" crowd is coming from.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Alexis: While I (ironically it seems) agree with most of the conclusions in JBs post- and indeed with the general consensus that WOTC has its head up its butt- the fact that they are still in business says that we are not necessarily the majority in thinking so. Enough people are buying their products to keep them going. That has to be a lot of people. People with different tastes than mine. But who am I to say they're wrong in what they like. I... am going to stop here, because I know we've all heard the arguments about personal taste in gaming, etc.

    As far as separating the hobby from commercialism, I think I (and many old school gamers) have been doing that for years now. Quite simply put, to me, WOTC does not represent MY hobby, and it never has. Which is why I don't care much what they put out anymore.

    And as far as capitalism goes? Yep. That's the government. As I said. I have problems with that system ;)

    ReplyDelete
  17. I am not going to get into the capitalism argument now. It's not really to the point anyway.

    Ok so let's say you like to play original D&D (which ever version that is to you) and you have no desire to buy the new products. Great! But I have to ask, if you have no dog in this hunt then why does it matter what is said? In a sense I would argue you are not part of the population the company is trying to reach.

    For example, I don't read romance novels, so why would I care what they do or the companies that own them? I have nothing against books, or romance, or even romance novels in a general sense. So do I care? No. Not really. I can have an opinion about them sure, but I should expect the community of those who like them to care about my opinion.

    I play all D&D. In the last month I have had the privilege (and I do say privilege because one thing I don’t have is a lot of time) to play D&D3, D&D4, Basic D&D and 1st Ed AD&D. Before the month is out I’ll get to add Pathfinder to that list. I am giddy as hell, I never had it so good as a gamer as I have it now.

    I like games. I like a lot of different games. I support the people that write them with money when I can, blog posts when I can’t or both. So in the last 96 hours I have purchased 5 new games, 1 is an old TSR game, another an ancient 7th tier publisher, 2 from a 4th tier publisher and 1 from an indie publisher. This games could be great, they could suck, I don't know yet, but I want to give people the chance to surprise me to write something that will be fun for me and my groups. And the reality is I can't expect people to give me these things for free, I have to pay for them. I’d love everyone to play Ghosts of Albion at least once because I LOVED writing it. But even so I can’t be expected to give away copies especially since the publisher needs to pay people. I gladly purchased B/X Companion and I love it. I can’t wait to use it again. But despite how much pleasure that product gives me, I can’t expect to get it for nothing.

    WotC is the same way, just much larger. I have room for them and indie publishers and some dude with a website and an account on POD service in my hobby and on my shelves.

    Why is that a bad thing?

    Now to be fair. There is nothing wrong with the "Three Pillars" as a design perspective. The only question is "is this the kind of game you would like". IF you say no, then no big deal, don't buy that game. If you say yes, then no big deal, buy that game. If have said no before the question is even asked, well I got nothin for that. Confusion maybe.
    We make all sorts of design assumptions that may or may not be right. They could shake out in play tests or later in the market. IN fact certain design assumptions were made for D&D4 and they were not corrected in playtests, but were in the larger market. WotC is actually doing what they should be doing by going back to the drawing board to fix them. Yes they are going to charge for them, they have mortgages to pay too.

    Am I a salesman? I don't know. I prefer to think of myself more as an RPG evangelist. Only without the big hair. I say "seek out your fun" if you have found it, Great! Praise be to Gary! If not, well never fear, there are 1,000s of games out there. Not all of them are great for you, some are terrible in fact, but there is one out there. Maybe it was born on the boards of The Forge or in some guy's collection of house rules. Or maybe by a bunch of guys sitting in room spending hours a day talking about games and how they should be played. Sometimes that room is your GM's basement, sometimes it is the corporate office and you can get paid to do it.

    In the end, as long as we get something we enjoy; either now or something published 30+ years ago then isn't that more important?

    ReplyDelete
  18. rologutwein,

    I don't think I really care that WOTC wants to stay in business. I think, seriously, if WOTC wants to be in business, they should keep on with that, and provide Tim and anyone else with everything they want.

    I think what WOTC should stop doing - or more to the point, what we should stop giving them credit for - is having any say whatsoever regarding what D&D "is." Fundamentally, a business creates what its customers want. When it starts thinking it's smarter than the customer, it's already rotten through the centre. I point to the music industry, the film industry, the video industry, the tourism industry, etc.

    Can I just say it? There is a really, really successful industry that provides everything the customer wants, without having to issue press notices about what the product does, what it's used for, how it's important to the customer or what new 'thing' is coming out next year to meet the customer's need. I'm talking about the drug industry.

    WOTC needs to shut the hell up and just make better stuff.

    ReplyDelete
  19. My head my head!

    Jesus, where do you even start here.

    I believe the Mayans called it for this year because the world has flipped upside down. Dear GOD I'm agreeing with Alexis.

    And the whole shebang is real easy to under stand:

    Same dog crap. Brand new paper bag. Flaming on a doorstep near you soon.

    WotC is a CLOSET at Hasbro. They are not in business because they are doing something right. If so why do they seem to fire somebody every 35 seconds? They are still around (as far as D&D goes) because Hasbro keeps hoping that some group of designers they hire might actually make a dime off the biggest name in gaming.

    They are in business because of Magic and a patent. Hasbro has publicly acknowledged that WotC amounts to less than 2% of their total sales...yes, they are a pimple on the ass of a massive corporation. If they were out there swinging in the wind like other game makers right now they would be closing down the Dept and focusing on what sells - Magic.

    This is smoke and mirrors.
    This is vaporware.

    Try to break it down like this. Say you wanted to form a new American Nazi political party that included not only Aryans BUT Jews as well. How do you swing that?

    Answer: YOU DON'T.

    That is the type of fundamental difference we are talking about here.

    Watch-Old Schoolers don't do skills. New Schoolers want to build tanks and roll through dungeons. 3.x people already have a nice stable game and are happy with it.

    Who is the product for??? The hardcore 4e won't touch ANYTHING that smells of grognard. Old Schoolers (Imagine Chgowiz) would put the first rules lawyer through a wall and besides they already own the game...some ten times over...

    And finally somebody else says it:

    But I have to wonder, how many times does it have to be said? How many ways does it have to be said? Who gives a rat's ass what these guys think the game of D&D is about? I realize that a lot of people want to keep giving them the benefit of the doubt, but these doofus morons at WOTC are so far from the cutting edge of this game as to put them off the design board entirely. This is increasingly evident from every damn thing they say. Especially since everything they say is designed to SELL, not to improve the game.

    When do we stop bothering to notice they exist?


    THANK YOU!

    And rologutwein, it's not about playing what you like. This community has turned into a bunch of game fascists telling us how we need to get behind this new noise whatever it is 5e, reprints or whatever. Only if I'm pushing it to the edge of a cliff.

    Look at this about the reprints:

    My own personal feeling is that everyone in the old school community should be preparing to buy these when they come out

    http://wastedlandsfantasy.blogspot.com/2012/01/ad-regarding-reprints.html

    Really? Buy a product from a company I don't support and a product that I already own? Do I look that braindead?

    And don't miss out on Tim down in the comments:

    Seriously the grognards (lower case g) need to fucking get over themselves and stop bitching and seeing conspiracies where there are none.

    -Timothy Brannan Jan 28, 2012 06:20 AM

    Good going there Tim. Nice one to show the kids. "Hey look, daddy is saying bad words AND being a game Nazi at the same time". I'm certain they will be proud of that little outburst.

    This community is ripping itself apart and we expect people from different editions to all sit down at a table and make nice?

    Cold day in hell, brother, cold day in hell...

    ReplyDelete
  20. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  21. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  22. ADD Grognard,

    The blog is eating posts. It isn't you.

    Incidentally, I want to point out: Canada is a part of the United States where the people are so smart they don't have to pay taxes to Washington or obey any of its silly laws.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I hope you are right man cause I don't know what is going on anymore...nothing makes any kind of sense...I don't know where I am...and me and you being on the same side of the street when it comes to WotC?...well...that is a dangerous proposition :)

    ReplyDelete
  24. Hahaha! WotC can't win, can they? They release 4E without so much as a public playtest, and "they're not listening to the players!" They discuss the design process openly, and "they just need to shut up and make better stuff!" Whatever, dudes.

    Anyway, I don't see what you're so up in arms about, JB. Those "pillars" are pretty obvious: interaction with NPCs, exploration, and combat really are three of the main things that players do in a game. The few other things that are done in games are mostly spreadsheet crap*. Your three pillars are pretty much generalizations of WotC's three or are spreadsheet crap ("challenge" = combat or exploration or interaction, "reward" = spreadsheet crap, "escape" = combat).


    *Which is crap I love, don't get me wrong. Logistics is a big part of the game to me. People who say that encumbrance or tracking arrows is "un-fun" shouldn't be playing adventure games. They should be writing novels, which pays a lot better. Basically, what I'm saying is that WotC is missing an important fourth pillar, Logistics.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Let me add: WotC's "pillars" are so obvious that it's stupid that they felt the need to even state it. I mean, really. It's stupid theorizing like the Forge does: practically useless and destructive to real design.

      Delete
  25. My head my head!

    Jesus, where do you even start here.

    I believe the Mayans called it for this year because the world has flipped upside down. Dear GOD I'm agreeing with Alexis.

    And the whole shebang is real easy to under stand:

    Same dog crap. Brand new paper bag. Flaming on a doorstep near you soon.

    WotC is a CLOSET at Hasbro. They are not in business because they are doing something right. If so why do they seem to fire somebody every 35 seconds? They are still around (as far as D&D goes) because Hasbro keeps hoping that some group of designers they hire might actually make a dime off the biggest name in gaming.

    They are in business because of Magic and a patent. Hasbro has publicly acknowledged that WotC amounts to less than 2% of their total sales...yes, they are a pimple on the ass of a massive corporation. If they were out there swinging in the wind like other game makers right now they would be closing down the Dept and focusing on what sells - Magic.

    This is smoke and mirrors.
    This is vaporware.

    Try to break it down like this. Say you wanted to form a new American Nazi political party that included not only Aryans BUT Jews as well. How do you swing that?

    Answer: YOU DON'T.

    That is the type of fundamental difference we are talking about here.

    Watch-Old Schoolers don't do skills. New Schoolers want to build tanks and roll through dungeons. 3.x people already have a nice stable game and are happy with it.

    Who is the product for??? The hardcore 4e won't touch ANYTHING that smells of grognard. Old Schoolers (Imagine Chgowiz) would put the first rules lawyer through a wall and besides they already own the game...some ten times over...

    And finally somebody else says it:

    But I have to wonder, how many times does it have to be said? How many ways does it have to be said? Who gives a rat's ass what these guys think the game of D&D is about?...

    When do we stop bothering to notice they exist?


    THANK YOU!

    And rologutwein, it's not about playing what you like. This community has turned into a bunch of game fascists telling us how we need to get behind this new noise whatever it is 5e, reprints or whatever. Only if I'm pushing it to the edge of a cliff.

    Look at this about the reprints:

    My own personal feeling is that everyone in the old school community should be preparing to buy these when they come out

    http://wastedlandsfantasy.blogspot.com/2012/01/ad-regarding-reprints.html

    Really? Buy a product from a company I don't support and a product that I already own? Do I look that braindead?

    And don't miss out on Tim down in the comments:

    Seriously the grognards (lower case g) need to f****** get over themselves and stop bitching and seeing conspiracies where there are none.

    -Timothy Brannan Jan 28, 2012 06:20 AM

    Good going there Tim. Nice one to show the kids. "Hey look, daddy is saying bad words AND being a game Nazi at the same time". I'm certain they will be proud of that little outburst.

    This community is ripping itself apart and we expect people from different editions to all sit down at a table and make nice?

    Cold day in hell, brother, cold day in hell...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Stop talking about my kids.

      You can say anything you like about me, my blog, my games anything. But do not bring up my kids in another post.

      I do not and have not made any personal attack against you or any other blogger, I request in front of this community that you do the same.

      Delete
  26. Frankly anytime anyone uses "Nazi" in an argument they have already lost the argument.

    If I have been adamant about anything it has been "if you are not playing for the game or paying for the game then you opinion on the game does not hold much weight".

    Really.


    If you are not going to buy the new game. Great. Fantastic. Wonderful even.

    But guess what.

    Others will. Many others. That doesn't make them sheep or stupid. It means .....they like a different game than you.

    ReplyDelete
  27. For starters Tim I expected a little better out of you. When you throw hissy fits and start dropping f-bombs, well, that puts you in another place.

    And when you use the term 'grognard' in the manner you did and maybe you might have noticed who is posting this, it is meant in a derogatory manner and maybe you need to get over yourself and learn to have a little respect for others. It looks like there were more than a few who disagreed with the dialogue at Jason's post, not just me.

    I'm proud to be a grognard. I'm proud of my wargaming roots and the brother who served in the Air Force and brought this world to me when I was 9 and when you treat me with some respect you will receive it in turn.

    And I'm not saying anything about your kids. I'm saying that post isn't fit for children, yours or any one elses, and being a teacher and a fellow gamer you should be ashamed of that post.

    You wanna disagree, fine, but that comment is offensive in every way. And yes I do take that as a personal attack and so would many others out here.

    ReplyDelete
  28. @ ADD Grognard:

    Dude, as Alexis said, it's blogger that's eating the posts. I wouldn't delete a decent rant from my comments section, Jeez!

    Look, I'm going to call a big "time out" here, 'cause I think everyone typing really loud at everyone else is really on the same side of this argument. You folks like D&D. You like to play it. You don't want it all f'd up. It's sad the way young whipper-snappers have to suck for so many decades before they grow a clue...most of us (including myself) was once a young, clueless guttersnipe, too.

    Folks, I've already said that Hasbro doesn't care about hobby industries: they're a huge-ass corporation trying to stay afloat in a world where the economy is in the crapper and people have enough to worry about with mortgages and groceries and skynormous phone bills without buying the latest classic board game, let alone an 600 page "update" of a game that they're either A) already playing in a simpler edition or B) have already decided is not for them. Fuck 'em (and pardon my French).

    I've ALSO already said that the best way to show disapproval is to simply not support them financially (i.e. don't buy what they're selling); however, as they could care less about our "less than 2%" (and shrinking all the time), that's not a whole helluva' lot of voting power.

    Personally, I am NOT terribly excited about 5E or the things those folks are doing. 3E was impressive (despite inevitably being a throwaway), but you know what? It had Jonathan Tweet working on it, and he IS a game designer I respect, as I've written before. Monte Cook is a big name, but the games he cut his teeth on (Champions? 2nd Edition?) is nothing I'm terribly impressed with...and Mearls lost all credibility for me when he failed to understand Keep on the Borderlands (and I'm sure he thinks I'm a dipshit as well...if Ye Old Blog even registers on his lofty radar).

    BUT (and here's why I even bother talking about what the F WotC is doing instead of strictly disengaging from the conversation and ignoring the hell out of 'em)...BUT I'm starting to think that I've been a little tunnel-visioned in the past (go figure!) and completely failed to note some of the underlying power of the D&D game...sure it has its own greatness, but it also has a consistent strength that runs through most editions of the game. I talked about it in my recent post "Nuance" (Feb 1st), it's part of the reason behind my "gamer survey," and it's something I plan on revisiting once I've finished my Three Pillars posts.

    And when I see stuff like this swill, I can't help but feel it's a missed opportunity.

    But as I wrote at the beginning, I'm just one man spouting off his opinion; it's a gaming blog, not the Magna Carta. Hell, maybe I'm dead wrong and they're dead right...they're the ones making a living off this thing, not me.

    Think of it as stuff to chew over in your mind; a mental toothpick, okay?
    ; )

    ReplyDelete