4DVENTURE!

[famine]

Thanks for all the intel, guys.  Makes it much easier to decide where to spend the precious $.  Of course, Crafty gets it first (I've had my dinero put away for 2nd printing for a while now, because of the holy grail that is the new gear layout).  That's one thing I love about these boards, people let things go that would otherwise become a huge pain in the arse.

[Bill Whitmore]

Me after buying the first "Starter Pack" (PHB) for D&D 4th Ed:  Ooh, ooh, what do we have here?  Barbarian, Druid, Fighter, Sorcerer...um, where's the rest of the classes, like Cleric and Wizard?

Hobby Store: Oh, didn't you hear?  This is a CRPG (Collectable Role-Playing Game).  The starter pack comes with an assortment of base classes.  If you would like the others, I have some Booster PHB packs behind the counter.  If you are lucky, you may even get one of the Rare PRCs, like the Shadow Dancer.

*   *   *

I like D&D, I can say that I have had a lot of fun with it.  It's not my favorite system, but it's workable.  It's also the single easiest game to find players for since just about everyone who role-plays has played it.

I was skeptical when 3rd ed came out, but, in all honesty, the game did quite well.  Even the 3.5 edition fixed a lot of the little loop-holes and problems with the game and I was pleased with it.  Most of the things I hear people complain about with regards to 3.5 is along the lines of "OMG, I AM NOT OVERPOWERED ANYMORE".  There are other arguments against it, but that covers about 90% of them.

While I am again skeptical of 4th ed. (and, please god, don't let the above scenario come about) I will take a wait and see attitude on the system.  Maybe they will surprise me again.

[Mister Andersen]

What WotC's 4th Ed digital initiative is all about.

[Forcegypsy]

I'm pretty sure it's going to be good/an improvement. I like the idea behind Saga and especially as it applies to Starwars gaming. Regarding 4th edition, what WotC is going to be doing to encounters sounds intriguing. They've apparently vastly decreased GM prep time which is a laudable goal in and of itself. No dead levels fixes a pet peeve of mine. I'm going to at least take a look. If they manage to make their design cleaner, I'll be pleased.

Spycraft for me starts with design philosophy, after that the things layered on top really allow for the kind of gaming/g.m.-ing I enjoy.

[Number Three]

What WotC's 4th Ed digital initiative is all about.

OK, so Gleemax is to gamers as Myspace is to bands.  Note, I did not say, "Gleemax is Myspace for gamers."  It's a subtle difference.  Bands go to Myspace not only because that's where all the kids are, but because Myspace has also given them enough of a tool set that they can promote themselves with relative ease.  Allegedly, Gleemax is giving us a tool set to hook up with other gamers and organize our campaigns.  Any tool set to find other gamers and facilitate gaming is welcome.  Other companies are invited, which is good, because otherwise Gleemax becomes just another fortification on the WotC internet front.  This has the possibility of being very neat.  Is this actually new to any of us?  Hell no, but it seems the theme of the D&D Digital Initiative is, "Find everything that gamers have been kludging together on the internet for the past ten years without us, and slap our name on it."

Which brings us to D&D insider.   You get Dungeon mag and Dragon mag, now online, with all the nifty tools they promised us when 3rd Edition came out, and an online table, for the price of... well, the monthly rate of Dungeon and Dragon hardcopy.  OK, sure.  It's the digital versions that utterly fail.  Every book has a code.  They've been doing this on Magic booster backs for a few years, so I assume it's unique to the copy of the book.  Plug it in and give them a buck, and, as long as you haven't been keygen'ed, you get a digital copy.  But wait, where are the crunchy bits?  I'm sorry, you're not a D&D Insider subscriber.  You only get the fluff text.  So mostly, you've just given Hasbro a dollar because you felt like being nice to them.  It's hard, you know?  Being a multinational corporation.  No one ever gives the multinationals any love.  They don't get invited to the cool kids parties...

BWAHAHAHAHA!!  [wipes tears of laughter]  I'm sorry, I couldn't keep that up.  So, yeah, D&D Insider has potential for much cool if you play a lot of D&D, and I give e-versions a FAIL.  As for the actual contents of 4E, all I can do is Wait & See.  I admit, I'm actually a little hopeful on that front.  Dead levels tick me off to no end, but then I also like customizing my skills, even if I never have enough skill points.

[Corinthi]

Also, with D&D Insider, you get a chargen program, and various DM tools for designing encounters/adventures.

Now, I've no idea how well they'll pull this D&D Insider thing off, and there are a lot of ambitious plans, and a lot of unanswered questions. While it's entertaining to make fun of Wizards and Hasbro as an 'evil multinational', I'm withholding judgment for the time being. There's going to be a free trial wherein we'll actually be able to use and play with the fiddly bits. I suspect that free trial will tell me if D&D Insider is worth my $10ish bucks a month.

As far as the digital versions of books, there are a /lot/ of unanswered questions about that, and right now I just don't have enough to go on. Frankly, if someone wants an PDF version of a gaming book, they aren't that hard to come by, so Wizards is in a weird position. They want to protect their IP, but put too much constraints on the E-Version's usefulness, and a lot of folks will just fire up a file sharing application.

Now, what they have said is that the small fee populates said book's data throughout the various D&D Insider's applications. That alone could be worth it if the DM tools and Character Creator are useful and well made.

Will it be worth $10ish bucks a month?

*shrugs* Dunno. That's what the free trial is for.

[ThunderMonkey]

I used to be part of the camp that said "there are never enough skill points".

However, as of late (I blame either old age or just hanging around here) I've taken the position that there is just enough skill points needed.

In character creation, I believe my character is based upon the decisions I didn't make, not the decisions I made. I don't expect that to make sense, but it goes along with the recent mantra I have adopted: "Music is the silence between the notes."

Dead Levels — they're obscene, but not nearly as bad as "Front loading" characters (i.e. various incarnations of the Ranger class).

[Mister Andersen]

I think it's telling tha the only time I didn't play a ranger or rogue in a 3rd ed game, I felt gypped.

[Bill Whitmore]

After the debacle that was D&D's e-Tools, I am not enthused by the prospect of having character generation software (or any software) that WotC is offering at this time.  Hopefully they will make me eat my words (and if they do they can rub my nose in it if they want) but frankly, I expect their software to be a piece of s***.

[Crafty_Pat]

They can do whatever they want, it's there sandbox.  I'm just the one stuck trying to build a business plan around it.  It's either gonna take, or the drones will finally say, "you know, I'm perfectly happy with what I have now."  I heard some chest pounding over Second Edition, but that resistance never materialized.  No one said a whimper about 3.5 until the day it came out, and then I got stuck with a flood of customers and no product.  3.5 also popped the D20 bubble (or at least accelerated the deflation.)

Probably, but the glut of low-grade third-party product probably didn't help, either.

As to people taking to the new system, the poll over at RPGNet pretty overwhelmingly shows that they will. Can't find the thread just now, though... I'm confident that it being Wizards, people will adjust. It's how the industry works. What I find interesting is how much 4E is the same (still with the PHB/DMG/MM and OGL, both of which were things I would have eliminated), and how much it's different (compressed skill set, social "combat" from the looks of it, Defenses probably). It's a pot luck to me. Doesn't really serve the audience or the brand. Whether the blend will wind up working for either is anyone's guess, but again, I think people will buy anyway.

[Bill Whitmore]

Whether the blend will wind up working for either is anyone's guess, but again, I think people will buy anyway.

I would have to agree.  Even on a forum that is dedicated to an entirely different d20 game, 4th ed. has spawned a 6 page topic on the subject.

Edit:  And it is likely to grow further.

[spinningdice]

I'm pretty sure I'll pick it up sooner or later. Whether I rush out and buy it straight away or wait 6 months is the only real question.

Once I've checked out the core books I'll make a decision on whether to expend, but the amount of time I play D&D - it's probably a core book only thing for me.

[meadicus]

I certainly don't plan on running D&D again any time soon, though that was the case before th 4E announcement. I expect other GMs in my group will run it and I'll end up getting the PHB. But as far as my own medieval GM'ing goes, I'm waiting on my toes for FantasyCraft. What I hope that can provide for me which D&D never has (and looks even less likely to do in the 4E) is provide low/non-magic gaming in a medieval world. You take the magic out of 3.5 and it dies almost instantly.

[Crafty_Pat]

My question is what will Crafty do with 4th ed.  Will we see a SC 2.5 incorporating the updated OGL or something along the line of Back to Basics?

We plan to ignore 4E (or 4D, or whatever the hell the kids are calling it these days), just as we ignored 3.5. We're a 3.0 variant and thus we shall remain - until and unless we go to a new edition (which at present we have no plans to do).

[Crafty_Pat]

I know the MMOs are kicking roleplaying's teeth in, but trying to emulate their business plan at an exponential consumer cost will not beat back the 800 pound gorilla named WoW.

Their goal isn't to beat the gorilla back, but rather to learn from it. I'm willing to bet that the internal risk assessment hedges fairly heavily on the assumption that more people will choose to purchase optional material than might stop playing because of it. Personally, I think that's a safe assumption.

Any game company intending to survive in the current climate is going to have to find new ways to generate revenue, or accept their place at the bottom of the food chain. That's the reality of it.