4E: What do we do?
Moderators: Shir'le E. Illios, Bhaern Quel
-
Talwyn Aureliano
- Lord||Lady
- Posts: 1480
- Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 2:27 pm
- Location: Western Australia
- Contact:
-
Narsia Ny'Dhun
- Resident
- Posts: 450
- Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 3:51 pm
- Contact:
-
Narsia Ny'Dhun
- Resident
- Posts: 450
- Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 3:51 pm
- Contact:
-
Talwyn Aureliano
- Lord||Lady
- Posts: 1480
- Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 2:27 pm
- Location: Western Australia
- Contact:
Aside from launching a "kill ;em all and let the demons sort 'em out campaign", I thought this blog which was written by a long time poster over on CandleKeep may by of interest to people here.
KnightErrantJr has some very interesting things to say about the whole 4E debarcle.
Read on
[url=http://knighterrantjr.livejournal.com/3 ... l:3bdop2l0][KnightErrantJR's Gamer Blog - Theories Abound[/url:3bdop2l0]
[b:3bdop2l0]
Nov. 23rd, 2007 08:20 pm Theories Abound
With all of this talk about 4th edition and "firing the customer" and finding a new customer base and the like, I see a lot of statements about what the WOTC guys are thinking and why they are doing what they are doing. I don't think that we can, without being part of the process, honestly, with definitive authority, say why they are doing the things they are doing, or what is driving them beyond what they have already stated.
That having been said, I have some theories on this. I also want to say that I don't think there are any real villains here, just a series of events that moves the game in a certain direction, and while there are those of us it doesn't work for and doesn't serve, its pretty much the way things are right now.
Hasbro's Part (My Take)
Erik Mona on Paizo's boards pointed out that Hasbro is a big company that spends a certain amount on the employees that work for WOTC, and when you compare the profits they get back from the same expenditure of salaries in other areas, D&D, even if its profitable, most certainly doesn't have the same profit margin that the other Hasbro lines do.
Its also been stated that Hasbro really bought WOTC because they wanted the (at the time) massively profitable Pokemon card game. They likely didn't really even noticed that they also had picked up the D&D license along with everything else. In fact, they most likely didn't notice it much at all until the "Pokemon" bubble burst, and Hasbro started to look at how profitable the rest of WOTC was.
To this end, Hasbro really has never really known what to do with D&D. Its got massive name recognition, but few people really know what it is, and its still got a bit of the specter of the 80s mass hysteria going against it. Three years ago or so (about a year before 4th edition was authorized, apparently), WOTC execs mentioned, in an article in PC Gamer that they were trying to market the D&D "brand" in ways other than as a roleplaying game. Other than the miniatures game, which crosses over with the roleplaying game, this has largely not worked (i.e. D&D Online isn't near the player that WoW, or even Everquest II or Guild Wars is, and a direct to video D&D movie that was still pretty sad doesn't do much to "expand the brand")
I'm not sure if Hasbro directly ordered 4th edition (the designers seemed to indicate, during the GenCon interviews, that this was not the case), or if Hasbro just set a "benchmark" for where profits need to be, and releasing a new edition seemed to be the most logical way to accomplish this. Either way, I don't think that Hasbro gave specific order to change tons of things, or to pull back the licenses for various properties, but I do think that there may have been a bit of a push to redirect the demographic.
Why do I think this? Hasbro is a toy company. There prime demographics, the age groups they most comfortable marketing to, are much younger than the 30 year old age group that D&D currently plays to most. Hasbro is in unfamiliar, and unwanted, territory with an older demographic like this, and I think they would be much more comfortable with a younger crowd that naturally crossed over more with their other products.
In the end, I think Hasbro has, at most, said that they need more profits per product from WOTC, and that WOTC needs to pick up a younger demographic then they currently have. Neither of these things really makes them a monster, per se, and the biggest issue here is that it seems that Hasbro probably has set a certain deadline by which these benchmarks have to be set, and they don't know (and probably don't care to know) about the D&D playing community. In fact, they likely think of things in terms of their other lines. For example, they don't worry about the "Monopoly community" or the "Transformer" community, they only worry about the demographics of the people that have bought their stuff in the past and are likely to buy their stuff in the future.
Its sad, but is a reality of a property being owned by a large corporation. They aren't, by nature, going to be good at the "grass roots" kind of customer relations and feedback that many in the community may wish we had.
WOTC's Part
I think, by and large, a lot of the changes going on in D&D are being directed by the current pack of designers, within the parameters that Hasbro has set. I think a lot of the problem with the "feel" of the current edition is that WOTC is trying to simultaneously make a new game that will be easy and intuitive to a younger demographic (not dumbed down, per se, but something that, from the start, makes some logical sense to someone that has never had any exposure to D&D or its inspirational sources), and still have some classic elements that will appeal to long term gamers.
In some ways, I think that the WOTC guys may be a bit frustrated, because while Hasbro could probably care less if the "old guard" stuck around if the sales goals are achieved, I think the WOTC guys think that they are being good members of the gaming community by not totally starting over again and trying to keep some of us in the game. On the other hand, for a lot of people (though I have no idea what percentage this group represents) the half-measures to "build the bridges" to the past seem almost insulting.
In the end, the WOTC guys are, I think, in kind of a desperate position of having to make this work. I can see Hasbro doing one of two things if the sales don't start hitting certain marks. Either they sell of the property and wash their hands of the whole mess, which throws the whole gaming community into chaos until someone picks up the property and does something with it, or WOTC's current staff pretty much exits the game entirely, and in house Hasbro game designers take over to try their hands at making D&D a more mass market, younger game.
Not a good position to be in, and while I wouldn't make the decisions that they have, in this light its not too hard to see how they have come to some of the decisions they have implemented.
Theories on the Future
I think that even if 4th edition goes over, the drive to "standardize" the D&D brand will cause some changes if Hasbro keeps it. I can easily see that even if 4th edition is successful, Hasbro will likely want to be able to use people that are more "mainstream" game designers to work on the rules, and that D&D will become more of a modular, "lets play a scenario" kind of game than a true roleplaying game (something more like the Descent board game, for example).
I think that more and more there will be a drive, if the actual game settings (like Forgotten Realms and Eberron) continue in the future, to keep the history and backstory of those worlds simple so that designers that have never seen the settings before can work on them. In this regard, general themes will likely be much more important than deeply detailed and nuanced backgrounds.
Are there any bad guys?
I don't know if they are "bad" per se, but I do think in the midst of all of this there are some designers that have "always wanted to try" a given new rule or idea, or they have wanted to get rid of something that has bothered them about a given setting, and the drastic changes and frantic nature of the complete overhaul has given them a sort of aegis under which some of their personal preferences can be imposed. I think in some cases it may be a matter of confirmation bias as well. When some of the designers have had a problem with something, and they see a few voices agree with them, suddenly they feel like they have a mandate.
I also think that there are likely a few intermediaries that probably do have the ability to bridge the gap between knowing the fanbase and knowing what corporate wants, but I think that instead of making the effort to work as diplomats, we have some feeling that they might be "insulated." If the WOTC guys that have been there a while fail, its "their" failure, not the intermediary's failure, and if it all works, they get to deliver the good news. If D&D is sold off or Hasbro types take direct control, the intermediary's likely just get sent to a new job for a while, rather than be held accountable, so why make the effort?
So while I think there may not be any "villains" in this situation, I think there may be some people that have the chance to be heroes that have instead decided to try something they always wanted to or to coast through their job assignments, rather than try to do something that might be a bit more difficult to manage.
Something to ponder
It may be that while a lot of us have had this as a hobby for decades, that D&D is something that isn't going to last indefinitely. Three decades is a pretty good run for any cultural phenomenon, and it may be that its run its course, and no matter what kind of marketing happens, its not really going to "save" the hobby.
Here is something to think about. Mickey Mouse has great name recognition, and recognizability as an icon, as does, for example, Buggs Bunny. Neither of their characters has a regular, current media presence beyond being the "spokes cartoon" for their companies. They mainly show up in commercials or reruns. In fact, the only "current" regular presence good old Buggs has right now is as a semi-serious, horribly implemented cartoon about the traditional Looney Tunes characters reimagined as super heroes.
It could very well be that "our" D&D is soon to be relegated to our fond memories and will exist only without "current" support. It may not fade from the popular vernacular for most of our lifetimes, but this doesn't mean that it will exist in the form that we would like it to for the duration of lifespan as a pop culture icon. [/b:3bdop2l0]
KnightErrantJr has some very interesting things to say about the whole 4E debarcle.
Read on
[url=http://knighterrantjr.livejournal.com/3 ... l:3bdop2l0][KnightErrantJR's Gamer Blog - Theories Abound[/url:3bdop2l0]
[b:3bdop2l0]
Nov. 23rd, 2007 08:20 pm Theories Abound
With all of this talk about 4th edition and "firing the customer" and finding a new customer base and the like, I see a lot of statements about what the WOTC guys are thinking and why they are doing what they are doing. I don't think that we can, without being part of the process, honestly, with definitive authority, say why they are doing the things they are doing, or what is driving them beyond what they have already stated.
That having been said, I have some theories on this. I also want to say that I don't think there are any real villains here, just a series of events that moves the game in a certain direction, and while there are those of us it doesn't work for and doesn't serve, its pretty much the way things are right now.
Hasbro's Part (My Take)
Erik Mona on Paizo's boards pointed out that Hasbro is a big company that spends a certain amount on the employees that work for WOTC, and when you compare the profits they get back from the same expenditure of salaries in other areas, D&D, even if its profitable, most certainly doesn't have the same profit margin that the other Hasbro lines do.
Its also been stated that Hasbro really bought WOTC because they wanted the (at the time) massively profitable Pokemon card game. They likely didn't really even noticed that they also had picked up the D&D license along with everything else. In fact, they most likely didn't notice it much at all until the "Pokemon" bubble burst, and Hasbro started to look at how profitable the rest of WOTC was.
To this end, Hasbro really has never really known what to do with D&D. Its got massive name recognition, but few people really know what it is, and its still got a bit of the specter of the 80s mass hysteria going against it. Three years ago or so (about a year before 4th edition was authorized, apparently), WOTC execs mentioned, in an article in PC Gamer that they were trying to market the D&D "brand" in ways other than as a roleplaying game. Other than the miniatures game, which crosses over with the roleplaying game, this has largely not worked (i.e. D&D Online isn't near the player that WoW, or even Everquest II or Guild Wars is, and a direct to video D&D movie that was still pretty sad doesn't do much to "expand the brand")
I'm not sure if Hasbro directly ordered 4th edition (the designers seemed to indicate, during the GenCon interviews, that this was not the case), or if Hasbro just set a "benchmark" for where profits need to be, and releasing a new edition seemed to be the most logical way to accomplish this. Either way, I don't think that Hasbro gave specific order to change tons of things, or to pull back the licenses for various properties, but I do think that there may have been a bit of a push to redirect the demographic.
Why do I think this? Hasbro is a toy company. There prime demographics, the age groups they most comfortable marketing to, are much younger than the 30 year old age group that D&D currently plays to most. Hasbro is in unfamiliar, and unwanted, territory with an older demographic like this, and I think they would be much more comfortable with a younger crowd that naturally crossed over more with their other products.
In the end, I think Hasbro has, at most, said that they need more profits per product from WOTC, and that WOTC needs to pick up a younger demographic then they currently have. Neither of these things really makes them a monster, per se, and the biggest issue here is that it seems that Hasbro probably has set a certain deadline by which these benchmarks have to be set, and they don't know (and probably don't care to know) about the D&D playing community. In fact, they likely think of things in terms of their other lines. For example, they don't worry about the "Monopoly community" or the "Transformer" community, they only worry about the demographics of the people that have bought their stuff in the past and are likely to buy their stuff in the future.
Its sad, but is a reality of a property being owned by a large corporation. They aren't, by nature, going to be good at the "grass roots" kind of customer relations and feedback that many in the community may wish we had.
WOTC's Part
I think, by and large, a lot of the changes going on in D&D are being directed by the current pack of designers, within the parameters that Hasbro has set. I think a lot of the problem with the "feel" of the current edition is that WOTC is trying to simultaneously make a new game that will be easy and intuitive to a younger demographic (not dumbed down, per se, but something that, from the start, makes some logical sense to someone that has never had any exposure to D&D or its inspirational sources), and still have some classic elements that will appeal to long term gamers.
In some ways, I think that the WOTC guys may be a bit frustrated, because while Hasbro could probably care less if the "old guard" stuck around if the sales goals are achieved, I think the WOTC guys think that they are being good members of the gaming community by not totally starting over again and trying to keep some of us in the game. On the other hand, for a lot of people (though I have no idea what percentage this group represents) the half-measures to "build the bridges" to the past seem almost insulting.
In the end, the WOTC guys are, I think, in kind of a desperate position of having to make this work. I can see Hasbro doing one of two things if the sales don't start hitting certain marks. Either they sell of the property and wash their hands of the whole mess, which throws the whole gaming community into chaos until someone picks up the property and does something with it, or WOTC's current staff pretty much exits the game entirely, and in house Hasbro game designers take over to try their hands at making D&D a more mass market, younger game.
Not a good position to be in, and while I wouldn't make the decisions that they have, in this light its not too hard to see how they have come to some of the decisions they have implemented.
Theories on the Future
I think that even if 4th edition goes over, the drive to "standardize" the D&D brand will cause some changes if Hasbro keeps it. I can easily see that even if 4th edition is successful, Hasbro will likely want to be able to use people that are more "mainstream" game designers to work on the rules, and that D&D will become more of a modular, "lets play a scenario" kind of game than a true roleplaying game (something more like the Descent board game, for example).
I think that more and more there will be a drive, if the actual game settings (like Forgotten Realms and Eberron) continue in the future, to keep the history and backstory of those worlds simple so that designers that have never seen the settings before can work on them. In this regard, general themes will likely be much more important than deeply detailed and nuanced backgrounds.
Are there any bad guys?
I don't know if they are "bad" per se, but I do think in the midst of all of this there are some designers that have "always wanted to try" a given new rule or idea, or they have wanted to get rid of something that has bothered them about a given setting, and the drastic changes and frantic nature of the complete overhaul has given them a sort of aegis under which some of their personal preferences can be imposed. I think in some cases it may be a matter of confirmation bias as well. When some of the designers have had a problem with something, and they see a few voices agree with them, suddenly they feel like they have a mandate.
I also think that there are likely a few intermediaries that probably do have the ability to bridge the gap between knowing the fanbase and knowing what corporate wants, but I think that instead of making the effort to work as diplomats, we have some feeling that they might be "insulated." If the WOTC guys that have been there a while fail, its "their" failure, not the intermediary's failure, and if it all works, they get to deliver the good news. If D&D is sold off or Hasbro types take direct control, the intermediary's likely just get sent to a new job for a while, rather than be held accountable, so why make the effort?
So while I think there may not be any "villains" in this situation, I think there may be some people that have the chance to be heroes that have instead decided to try something they always wanted to or to coast through their job assignments, rather than try to do something that might be a bit more difficult to manage.
Something to ponder
It may be that while a lot of us have had this as a hobby for decades, that D&D is something that isn't going to last indefinitely. Three decades is a pretty good run for any cultural phenomenon, and it may be that its run its course, and no matter what kind of marketing happens, its not really going to "save" the hobby.
Here is something to think about. Mickey Mouse has great name recognition, and recognizability as an icon, as does, for example, Buggs Bunny. Neither of their characters has a regular, current media presence beyond being the "spokes cartoon" for their companies. They mainly show up in commercials or reruns. In fact, the only "current" regular presence good old Buggs has right now is as a semi-serious, horribly implemented cartoon about the traditional Looney Tunes characters reimagined as super heroes.
It could very well be that "our" D&D is soon to be relegated to our fond memories and will exist only without "current" support. It may not fade from the popular vernacular for most of our lifetimes, but this doesn't mean that it will exist in the form that we would like it to for the duration of lifespan as a pop culture icon. [/b:3bdop2l0]
In War: Resolution. In Defeat: Defiance. In Victory: Magnanimity. In Peace: Goodwill.
-
Dregonindil
- Maid
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2008 2:03 pm
Anyone who designed 4th ed and has seen the negative reception(not sure how big the reception is whether good or bad.. but anyways) is probably having one of those" oh shit" moments where they realized that perhaps asking fans what they wanted in new editions and then go ahead with the project. Instead it seems like the oh well we're gonna milk this more.. sooo we'll do this and if they're loyal dnd geeks(who'll kill another over the game) we have nothing to worry bout.
Guess what.. I have the same attitude to this as i do to capcom. hell with them, stick with what we have and IF anything good comes from it then maybe slowly venture out until then we stay how we are... besides... its the SAME deal with world of darkness.. there's probably more old world of darkness fans than there is new world of darkness... I wonder why...
Guess what.. I have the same attitude to this as i do to capcom. hell with them, stick with what we have and IF anything good comes from it then maybe slowly venture out until then we stay how we are... besides... its the SAME deal with world of darkness.. there's probably more old world of darkness fans than there is new world of darkness... I wonder why...
Site, story being redone
Stats added story still in works
http://dragcave.net/user/Zekafae (click please?)
Twilight vampires are the vampire equivalent of Pluto...
Stats added story still in works
http://dragcave.net/user/Zekafae (click please?)
Twilight vampires are the vampire equivalent of Pluto...
-
Unen_Stealthfoot
- Legend
- Posts: 1567
- Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 3:51 am
[color=darkred:clsckbr8]4E is enough to push me over onto WoW (which I have never played before. And am going to do so NOW.)
I vote that we release a certain resident werewolf onto WotC's boards, sit back, and enjoy the carnage. And do something horrible to Lisa Smedman.
Don't really know anything about Pathfinder, will have to check it out.[/color:clsckbr8]
I vote that we release a certain resident werewolf onto WotC's boards, sit back, and enjoy the carnage. And do something horrible to Lisa Smedman.
Don't really know anything about Pathfinder, will have to check it out.[/color:clsckbr8]
Life before death
Strength before weakness
Journey before destination
Strength before weakness
Journey before destination
-
Fire_Wraith
- Maid
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 7:00 am
Regarding Pathfinder, I do have some news on that front. Specifically, there *are* Drow in Golarion (the Pathfinder campaign world), and they are due to be the focus of the upcoming Adventure Path series of modules (a six-part story arc).
James Jacobs, the Editor-in-Chief, had this to say, regarding good-aligned drow:
"Never fear. By part two of Second Darkness we've already got a non-chaotic evil drow in the mix. I'm certain there will be more. I'm also certain none of them will be good in Second Darkness... but that after we've established the themes and presence of Golarion drow, we'll probably relax on that front. We CERTAINLY can't (and don't want to) forbid PCs from playing good aligned drow; I've done so several times myself, and it's FUN! Second Darkness, though, isn't a good campaign to do that... but others? Why not?"
The overall gist that I draw is:
-Drow are evil, underground elves, with dark skin and white hair.
-They worship a variety of demons, rather than Lolth (who is WotC Intellectual Property, anyway).
The first module of the Second Darkness adventure path is due out shortly, and should shed a lot of details regarding them, as will the Pathfinder Campaign Setting. I strongly suggest checking both out at [url=http://www.paizo.com:9w56v5d9]Paizo's website[/url:9w56v5d9]. If nothing else, the list of talent assembled to work on these things is no less than mind-blowing, including some of the best contributors to the Forgotten Realms (even Ed Greenwood himself).
James Jacobs, the Editor-in-Chief, had this to say, regarding good-aligned drow:
"Never fear. By part two of Second Darkness we've already got a non-chaotic evil drow in the mix. I'm certain there will be more. I'm also certain none of them will be good in Second Darkness... but that after we've established the themes and presence of Golarion drow, we'll probably relax on that front. We CERTAINLY can't (and don't want to) forbid PCs from playing good aligned drow; I've done so several times myself, and it's FUN! Second Darkness, though, isn't a good campaign to do that... but others? Why not?"
The overall gist that I draw is:
-Drow are evil, underground elves, with dark skin and white hair.
-They worship a variety of demons, rather than Lolth (who is WotC Intellectual Property, anyway).
The first module of the Second Darkness adventure path is due out shortly, and should shed a lot of details regarding them, as will the Pathfinder Campaign Setting. I strongly suggest checking both out at [url=http://www.paizo.com:9w56v5d9]Paizo's website[/url:9w56v5d9]. If nothing else, the list of talent assembled to work on these things is no less than mind-blowing, including some of the best contributors to the Forgotten Realms (even Ed Greenwood himself).
I think, that the 4th edition is garbage for those, who only want to kill all that moves. For myself, I always use a combination of 2nd and 3rd editions. I never abandon Forgotten Realms, because it's my favourite world, and I'm not familiar almost with other worlds, like pathfinder.
Lloth and Shadow Lord must be destroyed!
-
steelfiredragon
- Maid
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 7:12 am
some of the older gamers, are likely to be more familiar with Greyhawk, the forgotten realms, dragonlance, darksun, ravenloft and a few dead or combined with other settings.
eberron still blows, its full of political intrigue, I dislike polotics as it is.
oh and btw Alustriel Silverhand for 4e has passed away.
and the harpers are Dispanded.
and brought back to fight shade.
eberron still blows, its full of political intrigue, I dislike polotics as it is.
oh and btw Alustriel Silverhand for 4e has passed away.
and the harpers are Dispanded.
and brought back to fight shade.
-
steelfiredragon
- Maid
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 7:12 am
-
Serath En'Sendaran
- Maid
- Posts: 46
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 2:39 pm
- Contact:
[color=green:xs0kwtx8]I know it's been like, forever, since I've posted anything here. For that I feel kinda guilty. I also know I probably really don't have a leg to stand on in regards to anything pertaining to this. I just want to offer my two cents in regards to this tragedy.
I think this is crap. Personally, I feel that it was poorly done, poorly thought out, and poorly presented. I feel that Hasbro has taken a great setting, and "kiddy-fied" it, dumbed it down, and didn't give a moment of thought about who or what they were going to destroy or upset.
I had been leery of the "New, Improved, and with less calories" version of the Forgotten Realms since I bought the Grand History of the Realms. It wasn't, though, until I read what happened to the Dark Maiden that my fears were confirmed.
I also belong to the Candlekeep forum as well, and we're not the only ones seeing this new edition as an affront to a setting that we all loved and held dear.
In my FR game, my wife and I have developed the City of Norcastle. Located on the shores of the Lake of Mists in the Endless Plains, we have been waiting for the new edition before we finish the website that we were in the process of developing when the announcement of 4e came out. The city, in game, was near an Eilistraeen community, and the fate of that city was tied to the community. Now, I really don't know where to proceed. It's maddening in more ways then I can express.
My current theory is to support the Pathfinder-Forgotten Realms conversions, ignore the Spellplague, and the Silence of Lolth, very much like our dear Priestess has suggest previously. I've looked over the Pathfinder rules, and I find them just dandy. Heck, I've included Eilistraee in my Star Wars games. I may just do that as well. Priestess as Force Users... darn scary if you ask me.
I have played Fourth Ed. The rules aren't bad... they're just... World Of Warcraft done Tabletop. Which is the audience they're desprately attempting to entice. Not people that want substance. They want to woo all those people that decide that running around woods kill boars for 30 hours to go up a level is "good roleplaying".
I know I rambled, but I'm upset, and I tend to ramble when I'm frustrated. I haven't been this frustrated since the New Jedi Order books came out.
That being said, if there's anything I can do to help, let me know. I don't plan on buying the new Forgotten Realms stuff. If I really need it, there are... other paths... to get such materials, without giving WotC one red cent. (Not that I would ever promote doing anything that WotC might consider to be a crime... but considering what they've done to the Dark Maiden... in the words of Mal Reynolds: "I aim to misbehave.")
[/size:xs0kwtx8][/color:xs0kwtx8]
[Shir'le EDIT] Increased the font size to make it readable.
I think this is crap. Personally, I feel that it was poorly done, poorly thought out, and poorly presented. I feel that Hasbro has taken a great setting, and "kiddy-fied" it, dumbed it down, and didn't give a moment of thought about who or what they were going to destroy or upset.
I had been leery of the "New, Improved, and with less calories" version of the Forgotten Realms since I bought the Grand History of the Realms. It wasn't, though, until I read what happened to the Dark Maiden that my fears were confirmed.
I also belong to the Candlekeep forum as well, and we're not the only ones seeing this new edition as an affront to a setting that we all loved and held dear.
In my FR game, my wife and I have developed the City of Norcastle. Located on the shores of the Lake of Mists in the Endless Plains, we have been waiting for the new edition before we finish the website that we were in the process of developing when the announcement of 4e came out. The city, in game, was near an Eilistraeen community, and the fate of that city was tied to the community. Now, I really don't know where to proceed. It's maddening in more ways then I can express.
My current theory is to support the Pathfinder-Forgotten Realms conversions, ignore the Spellplague, and the Silence of Lolth, very much like our dear Priestess has suggest previously. I've looked over the Pathfinder rules, and I find them just dandy.
Heck, I've included Eilistraee in my Star Wars games. I may just do that as well. Priestess as Force Users... darn scary if you ask me. I have played Fourth Ed. The rules aren't bad... they're just... World Of Warcraft done Tabletop. Which is the audience they're desprately attempting to entice. Not people that want substance. They want to woo all those people that decide that running around woods kill boars for 30 hours to go up a level is "good roleplaying".
I know I rambled, but I'm upset, and I tend to ramble when I'm frustrated. I haven't been this frustrated since the New Jedi Order books came out.
That being said, if there's anything I can do to help, let me know. I don't plan on buying the new Forgotten Realms stuff. If I really need it, there are... other paths... to get such materials, without giving WotC one red cent. (Not that I would ever promote doing anything that WotC might consider to be a crime... but considering what they've done to the Dark Maiden... in the words of Mal Reynolds: "I aim to misbehave.")
[/size:xs0kwtx8][/color:xs0kwtx8]
[Shir'le EDIT] Increased the font size to make it readable.
Last edited by Serath En'Sendaran on Wed Aug 20, 2008 9:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Plynn ussta che, plynn ussta thac'zil,
plynn uns'aa vel'klar Usstan shlubnaut fre'sla,
Flamgra l'thac'zil lu'caghresst l'qu'mados,
dos shlubnaut plynn l'anulo dal uns'aa."
plynn uns'aa vel'klar Usstan shlubnaut fre'sla,
Flamgra l'thac'zil lu'caghresst l'qu'mados,
dos shlubnaut plynn l'anulo dal uns'aa."
Eilistraee in Star Wars!??! Wow, I thought I was strange. But seriously, how do you incorporate a deity in a world where religion got replaced (not counting the Yuzhan Vong or whatever their called and Jaina Solo's little scheme in Dark Journey) with the Force, a very real thing?
O and yeah, I almost cried when I heard Mara Jade dies and Jacen Solo becomes Darth Cadus.
O and yeah, I almost cried when I heard Mara Jade dies and Jacen Solo becomes Darth Cadus.
-
Serath En'Sendaran
- Maid
- Posts: 46
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 2:39 pm
- Contact:
Well, in the Star Wars Game, Eilistraee is a Force Spirit. She's the first of her kind that turned from the Dark Side, which was the tradition among her people. But that's my weird game. I've included Mum-Ra the Everliving as a Sith Lord in one of my Star Wars games as well, because I needed a bad guy quick.
I've included Mum-Ra the Everliving as a Sith Lord in one of my Star Wars games as well, because I needed a bad guy quick. "Plynn ussta che, plynn ussta thac'zil,
plynn uns'aa vel'klar Usstan shlubnaut fre'sla,
Flamgra l'thac'zil lu'caghresst l'qu'mados,
dos shlubnaut plynn l'anulo dal uns'aa."
plynn uns'aa vel'klar Usstan shlubnaut fre'sla,
Flamgra l'thac'zil lu'caghresst l'qu'mados,
dos shlubnaut plynn l'anulo dal uns'aa."