Saturday, March 8, 2008
Why WotC is Slash-and-Burning Dungeons & Dragons
That is a really interesting point of view and I think much of it has merit.
The fundamental tenant of his argument, however, is easily debatable; that is, how much of "The Game" is a system of rules and how much comes from the mind of the DM and his players.
None of us would argue that the style of the rules system doesn't have a huge effect on the game-play and the overall "vibe" of the game. There is no way I could effectively run a Ravenloft campaign with the 4.0 rules without significant modification, for instance. It just wouldn't make sense. For traditional fantasy, however, is seems very workable.
I've never been interested in the rules. They are a necessary component to the part of the game that I am interested in; story, role-playing, and companionship. To abandon much of the old system may not be a detriment but rather an advancement of those elements of the game. Though it remains to be seen, I'm hopeful.
I'm in favor of simplification. It will speed game play and enable those of us with less time and/or inclination to wrestle with 3.0 or 3.5 to become better acquainted with the system and thus have a more significant investment in the game. Who knows, with a more intuitive and accessible system Scott might manage to decide his character's action in somewhere under an hour!
The success of the game will depend on its flexibility and ease of play. Fourth edition seems to lean in that direction. I say the King is dead. Long live the King.
The fundamental tenant of his argument, however, is easily debatable; that is, how much of "The Game" is a system of rules and how much comes from the mind of the DM and his players.
None of us would argue that the style of the rules system doesn't have a huge effect on the game-play and the overall "vibe" of the game. There is no way I could effectively run a Ravenloft campaign with the 4.0 rules without significant modification, for instance. It just wouldn't make sense. For traditional fantasy, however, is seems very workable.
I've never been interested in the rules. They are a necessary component to the part of the game that I am interested in; story, role-playing, and companionship. To abandon much of the old system may not be a detriment but rather an advancement of those elements of the game. Though it remains to be seen, I'm hopeful.
I'm in favor of simplification. It will speed game play and enable those of us with less time and/or inclination to wrestle with 3.0 or 3.5 to become better acquainted with the system and thus have a more significant investment in the game. Who knows, with a more intuitive and accessible system Scott might manage to decide his character's action in somewhere under an hour!
The success of the game will depend on its flexibility and ease of play. Fourth edition seems to lean in that direction. I say the King is dead. Long live the King.
Comments:
<< Home
I don't know, Brad...none of the "simpler" games that we've tried have caught on with our group. Our group seems very married to "D&D".
Personally, I think it is because, with D&D, any of us can be inspired or add some fresh "juice" to a campaign by buying the next new expansion book. Or maybe it'st he cover art that gets people psyched. Or maybe it's the comfort of the game icons like "magic missile", "saving throws", "weapon specialization", or "backstab/sneak attack".
Regardless, our group seems to favor D&D as our game of choice.
In the past revisions, great care was taken to improve the game but to maintain the elements of the game that makes D&D unique.
This new revision appears to be taking a a more radical approach-they appear to be deliberately ripping away many of the key elements that separate D&D from other games. From what I hear, the changes look to make for a better (and possibly quicker) game.
My question ("Yes, but will it still be D&D?) still stands.
And if it is not D&D...Why should we invest the time and $ learning a new system when there are good systems (D20 Modern, 3.5, Hero) that we have already started learning and that (to some extent) we've already purchased?
Personally, I think it is because, with D&D, any of us can be inspired or add some fresh "juice" to a campaign by buying the next new expansion book. Or maybe it'st he cover art that gets people psyched. Or maybe it's the comfort of the game icons like "magic missile", "saving throws", "weapon specialization", or "backstab/sneak attack".
Regardless, our group seems to favor D&D as our game of choice.
In the past revisions, great care was taken to improve the game but to maintain the elements of the game that makes D&D unique.
This new revision appears to be taking a a more radical approach-they appear to be deliberately ripping away many of the key elements that separate D&D from other games. From what I hear, the changes look to make for a better (and possibly quicker) game.
My question ("Yes, but will it still be D&D?) still stands.
And if it is not D&D...Why should we invest the time and $ learning a new system when there are good systems (D20 Modern, 3.5, Hero) that we have already started learning and that (to some extent) we've already purchased?
I see that this post "landed" on the blog just fine -- don't know what my problem was. I deleted my reposting of it.
However, I don't think Decomposer's post had a link -- I found it at:
http://www.nuketown.com/node/2489
Now that I've read it, I find it interesting. I agree with him that I probably fall in that 30% who think that some of the race stuff is especially goofy. The rules mechanics might be easier (which could be a selling point) but as Big Sexy notes -- we have other options for simpler games in some ways... We repurchase it again.
Again, though, I personally would consider looking into it further for the online option as a tool to enjoy the game more frequently, maybe.
Post a Comment
However, I don't think Decomposer's post had a link -- I found it at:
http://www.nuketown.com/node/2489
Now that I've read it, I find it interesting. I agree with him that I probably fall in that 30% who think that some of the race stuff is especially goofy. The rules mechanics might be easier (which could be a selling point) but as Big Sexy notes -- we have other options for simpler games in some ways... We repurchase it again.
Again, though, I personally would consider looking into it further for the online option as a tool to enjoy the game more frequently, maybe.
<< Home
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]