|
Post by foxroe on Dec 10, 2010 19:26:08 GMT -6
Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Darke on Dec 10, 2010 19:28:02 GMT -6
It has a skin I don't?
|
|
|
Post by foxroe on Dec 10, 2010 19:44:58 GMT -6
Hint: the Ad...
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Darke on Dec 10, 2010 21:28:16 GMT -6
Oh that's it; you don't have Adblock...
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Dec 10, 2010 21:55:14 GMT -6
I assume you mean a 4E ad on an OD&D board?
|
|
|
Post by foxroe on Dec 11, 2010 9:40:02 GMT -6
Not just any old 4e add... an add for that abominable pseudo-retro box crap! On a board about the original box! I'm not sure why it bugged me so much, but it was like a cheese grater on my scalp at the time. Maybe it was the drink...
|
|
|
Post by vito on Dec 11, 2010 10:05:48 GMT -6
Not just any old 4e add... an add for that abominable pseudo-retro box crap! On a board about the original box! I'm not sure why it bugged me so much, but it was like a cheese grater on my scalp at the time. Maybe it was the drink... I don't know if I'd call it abominable. It might not be the original red box, but IMHO it's a decent improvement on the 4E line. I think we should encourage WotC to go more retro. Maybe if we, the consumers, can convince them that there is more money to be made by stripping down the rules and incorporating more oldschool sensibilities, 4E might evolve into OD&D.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Darke on Dec 11, 2010 10:57:57 GMT -6
I have no problem with 4e or the box. I don't play them but many do and get the same level of enjoyment I do with OD&D.
Automated ads work off certain keywords so I am not surprised the ad was there.
|
|
|
Post by Malcadon on Dec 11, 2010 13:34:39 GMT -6
Is this any different then the banner add with some Maple Story character fighting a Broccoli Monster only to get blasted by a Beholder from the 3.x/4e line? Although most folks likely ignored it, as it was targeted at a bunch of pre-pub Pokemon fans!
|
|
|
Post by aldarron on Dec 12, 2010 17:18:58 GMT -6
Not just any old 4e add... an add for that abominable pseudo-retro box crap! On a board about the original box! I'm not sure why it bugged me so much, but it was like a cheese grater on my scalp at the time. Maybe it was the drink... I don't know if I'd call it abominable. It might not be the original red box, but IMHO it's a decent improvement on the 4E line. I think we should encourage WotC to go more retro. Maybe if we, the consumers, can convince them that there is more money to be made by stripping down the rules and incorporating more oldschool sensibilities, 4E might evolve into OD&D. I can only imagine the frankenstienien abomination that would be a wotc "official" retroclone. <shudder>
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Dec 12, 2010 17:48:44 GMT -6
an add for that abominable pseudo-retro box crap! On a board about the original box! Well, actually the red box they are trying to mimic isn't the original box at all. 1. White Box OD&D 2. Holmes boxed BD&D 3. Moldvay/Cook B/X D&D 4. Mentzer BECMI D&D The red box they are copying is a 4th generation version of the game, but I get your point.
|
|
|
Post by Malcadon on Dec 12, 2010 19:32:55 GMT -6
From what I have been hearing, there are quit a number of 4e fans who like the Red Box rules more then the core 4e books, but these folks are the sort then did not like the direction - for one reason or another - the 4e game took to the game (but still enjoy the MtG-styled mechanics and the WoW-styled art found in the new rules, no less). To me the Red Box set is trying to copy the Dungeons & Dragons Complete Animated Series box set, with it's red box look with cleaned-up photoshopped art, use of newer rules for something that is trying to be retro (the cartoon set come with a booklet of stats and cobbled-together scenarios using the 3.5 rules), and all for something that has little to do with the actual game, save for some iconic monsters and a reused title. Bu the way, I'm so use to animated ads, that I gust learn to ignore them, as most of is is fore junk I already know about, or never really care for otherwise. In the preview screen I'm looking at as I'm typing this out, has Skechers (the sneakers company) advertising a contest with the Kardashians. Do anyone really gives two sh!ts about any of it?
|
|
|
Post by tavis on Dec 12, 2010 21:40:16 GMT -6
a bunch of pre-pub Pokemon fans I think you probably mean pre-pubescent, but I read it as pre-publication Pokemon and got excited for a Pikachu at Dawn scholarly re-construction of the undiscovered hobbyist roots of pocket monster fighting!
|
|
|
Post by Malcadon on Dec 13, 2010 5:13:15 GMT -6
I think you probably mean pre-pubescent... I'm not trying to split hairs (pun intend), but I'm just saying that they are too young to shave or wax. ...I read it as pre-publication Pokemon and got excited for a Pikachu at Dawn scholarly re-construction of the undiscovered hobbyist roots of pocket monster fighting! OK...? I learned the full history of Pokemon fighting in the back-allies of Tijuana.
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Dec 13, 2010 5:42:37 GMT -6
Does anyone own a copy of the offending Red Box and care to share any insight as to the content?
I have read most of the official waffle, but unfortunately it is rather light on for detail. I'd be interested to hear first hand whether this so called "essentials" line really is a bare bones game somewhat closer to the original... or if it's all just marketing spin to shift more product.
Anyone?
|
|
|
Post by vito on Dec 13, 2010 10:44:07 GMT -6
I have it.
It includes a set of dice, character sheets, two little booklets (one for players, the other for DMs) a foldout map (wilderness on one side, dungeon on the other) a couple sheets of cardboard tokens to use in place of miniatures, and a set of 'power cards'.
The Player's Book This 32-page booklet is like one of those old 'choose your own adventure' books. It walks new players through the process of character creation using a short 'solo adventure'. First you chose your race (human, halfling, dwarf, elf) and start out riding in a wagon. Your wagon is then attacked by a band of goblins and their human leader. From there you play through a small combat encounter with a series of decision points that will determine your character's class, ability scores, skills, equipment, and powers.
The DM's Book This 64-page booklet contains the basic rules of the game plus an adventure module. As far as adventures go, there isn't a whole lot of depth to this, but it is at least an improvement over previous 4E adventures like Keep on the Shadowfell. A group of adventurers from the merchant's caravan are chasing after the goblins that attacked them. The pursuit brings them to a derelict minotaur temple. The temple has two entrances, each one belonging to one of the rival group of monsters that lives in the dungeon. One entrance is guarded by goblins, the other leads to a large chamber where a white dragon and his kobold minions live. The dragon can be negotiated with. From there the party can explore a series of rooms including: The chambers of fire and water. A storage room full of random junk and goblins. An altar protected by two human guards and a doppleganger disguised as a human guard (the doppleganger is a potential ally; it will stab the two guards in the backs as soon as it gets a chance, and will then help the adventurers.) A secret room containing a giant chess board where the adventurers can fight giant chess pieces. A hidden laboratory where the adventurers can fight the man who attacked them before. It turns out that he is an evil wizard who has been using goblin minions to collect supplies for his necromantic experiments.
I felt that this was an improvement over the 4E line in terms of ease of use and flavor. It could have been a lot better though. I feel that the new Gamma World boxed set is a lot better for introducing new players to the game, and it has a lot more stuff for experienced players.
|
|
|
Post by foxroe on Dec 13, 2010 11:18:15 GMT -6
So does this mean that the WotC take on "old-school" is childishly non-sensical dungeons? Has 4ed nerfed dragons so badly that they can be thrown at 1st level parties? I know that an old-school tenet is that there is no such thing as encounter balance, but a group of experienced players would know to avoid a dragon encounter. Presuming that this is supposed to be an introductory game, then a low-level dragon encounter is sort of ridiculous to throw at inexperienced players.
It almost seems to me that it's a subtle way to get 4ed players to ignore anything "retro" as pedantic (or unsurvivable), so that they'll stick with what's currently making money for WotC/Hasbro.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Darke on Dec 13, 2010 12:39:23 GMT -6
Rumor has it that Mike Mearls (who is over the D&D Essentials line) is a big OD&D fan. He has also stated he is trying to sneak in as much classic ideals as he can while still pleasing his superiors.
I have heard good things from both 'old schoolers' and 'new schoolers' about the new line. It is not enough to make me try 4e again but I am glad that it is going well.
|
|
|
Post by tavis on Dec 13, 2010 13:07:31 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by foxroe on Dec 13, 2010 13:28:48 GMT -6
It's sort of like the BMW salesperson who still drives his beat-up old Toyota pick-up to work every day...
|
|
|
Post by vito on Dec 13, 2010 13:48:44 GMT -6
So does this mean that the WotC take on "old-school" is childishly non-sensical dungeons? Has 4ed nerfed dragons so badly that they can be thrown at 1st level parties? I know that an old-school tenet is that there is no such thing as encounter balance, but a group of experienced players would know to avoid a dragon encounter. Presuming that this is supposed to be an introductory game, then a low-level dragon encounter is sort of ridiculous to throw at inexperienced players. It almost seems to me that it's a subtle way to get 4ed players to ignore anything "retro" as pedantic (or unsurvivable), so that they'll stick with what's currently making money for WotC/Hasbro. In all fairness, it isn't much more nonsensical than any Gygaxian dungeon module I've played in. "What are all these flesh golems doing in this cave, and why do they all have prime numbers written on them? Except for that one." *edit* I know that discussions regarding editions can get rather heated, so I want to clarify: I don't mean to put down Gygax's dungeons when I call them nonsensical. I love them for their surreal and otherworldly charm. I want newschool dungeons to emulate this. I felt that the Red Box dungeon was a good attempt, but it needs to go a little farther. It would help if there was more than one level in the dungeon.
|
|
|
Post by foxroe on Dec 13, 2010 15:37:30 GMT -6
But "non-sensical" is palatable when it is used in context (i.e. Mad Wizard creates Puzzle-trap Dungeon), which is likely why Gygaxian "nonsense" never bugged me too much.
Now in all fairness, I haven't seen the contents of the red box for myself, so I may be spouting out an unfounded opinion based only on your summary. It just seems like the dragon is a bit arbitrary and unnecesary an inclusion, made just so it can be said, "There's a Dragon in this Dungeon... aren't we clever." Strictly from a gameplay perspective, it's not an ideal encounter for players who are trying to learn how to play D&D with low-level characters. That's nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by vito on Dec 13, 2010 16:38:59 GMT -6
But "non-sensical" is palatable when it is used in context (i.e. Mad Wizard creates Puzzle-trap Dungeon), which is likely why Gygaxian "nonsense" never bugged me too much. Now in all fairness, I haven't seen the contents of the red box for myself, so I may be spouting out an unfounded opinion based only on your summary. It just seems like the dragon is a bit arbitrary and unnecesary an inclusion, made just so it can be said, "There's a Dragon in this Dungeon... aren't we clever." Strictly from a gameplay perspective, it's not an ideal encounter for players who are trying to learn how to play D&D with low-level characters. That's nonsense. The dragon does teach a valuable lesson though; not all challenges should be met with violence. There are two rival factions of monsters in the dungeon. One of the factions is not hostile towards the PCs. That same faction includes a dragon. The PCs have a strong incentive not to fight the dragon, as it is quite tough. The PCs have a strong incentive to get the dragon on their side, as it would make a powerful ally. Hence, PCs may try to have a dialog with the dragon. You now have an opportunity for role play where otherwise you would just have hack'n'slash. *edit* ...and if the PCs try to attack the dragon, they will learn a different lesson: They can die if they act recklessly.
|
|
|
Post by foxroe on Dec 14, 2010 7:52:55 GMT -6
I suppose that makes more sense (and like I said, I haven't seen the box for myself). Still not going to buy it though.
|
|