RPGCentric » Blog Archive » Poll: Plethora of options

Poll: Plethora of options – Yea or Nay?

So yesterday I posted that I think Wizards is milking 4E for all it’s worth and the option train is barreling down the tracks. Personally, I think that the fact that Wizards is releasing so many books in such a short period of time is not necessarily a good thing. Of course, others disagree. I figured I’d post a poll to see what others think. Is the multitude of options coming out for 4E in such a short period of time (around 20 books in a 16 month period as opposed to around 30 books released for 3.5 in a span of 5 years) good for D&D? I’m only putting in two options, so feel free to post comments about your vote below.

Loading ...

Be Sociable, Share!

Posted in: 4E, RPG

9 Responses to “Poll: Plethora of options – Yea or Nay?”

greywulf December 23rd, 2008 at 6:03 PM

I think it’s good for D&D (hey, choice is always good, including the choice whether to buy them or not), but bad in the long term.

In the days of 3e, we had the glorious, wonderful OGL which meant we had loads of books being released every month from numerous publishers. Sure, the quality was variable (especially in the early days), but that improved over time and the D&D “brand” grew to cover many genres and playstyles. Mythic Vistas:Testament gave us biblical role-playing, and Judge Dredd gave us… well, Judge Dredd. We had d20 Everquest, Traveller, and much more.

Now, Wizards is trying to fill a hole of their own making with a pretty punishing release schedule. I don’t envy them, and give ‘em full credit for the releases so far as they’ve all been of a pretty high standard. The plans for 2009 don’t let up the pace either. Ouch.

What we gain is lots of options, but what we lose is the diversity of play. That makes the hobby, for my money, a poorer one overall.

Bring back the OGL, I say! Or at least, fix the GSL and bring more third party publishers back into the fold.

greywulf´s last blog post..Greywulf’s Games of the Year 2008

Questing GM December 23rd, 2008 at 7:14 PM

Hey, greywulf.

So what did you vote?

I have a love-hate relationship with options. As a player, I would love them because I can tinker alot with them. As a DM, I hate them because it gets harder and harder to keep track and not to mention the endless begging of players to use the latest options.

Looking at the game from a designer’s perspective, having too many options either means that they are either uncreative with their core ruleset to try and do everything or they successfully take it one step further.

I felt this in 3.x and that’s just only with the Wizards’ books.

However for 4E, I somehow feel that having many options is neccesary for the game to run. The core ruleset appears to be too rigid to bend so it would have to rely on other options to expand further in the long run.

In the end, I just can’t decide where to cast my vote.

Questing GM´s last blog post..One Thing One Campaign

Duco December 23rd, 2008 at 9:19 PM

so many books and so quick will make me join the grognards.

These kids today and their new fangled gaming systems…

Dead Orcs December 23rd, 2008 at 11:21 PM

Reveal, I think overall, the extra options so soon into the mix are a good thing. Wizards has gone a bit soft in the “modules” department (written adventures), so allowing DM’s more material in which to create their campaigns is a good thing. After all, in the 1st Edition days, modules were the place you got the sneak previews of monsters and magic items that might not appear in books for a couple of years down the line. Having all the choices also allows a game group (and it’s DM) to say, “Okay, this campaign will use x, y and m; but not z”; thus tailoring the campaign to a specific set of reference material.

Dead Orcs´s last blog post..Blog Carnival: Round 5 — Coming Full Circle

Scott December 24th, 2008 at 4:00 AM

I’m of the opinion that having more options is always a plus.

I’m also of the opinion that one of a GM’s rights, and obligations to his game, is to limit the options as necessary for the game.

I welcome all of it in print, but I don’t necessarily use all of it. But I’d rather have it and not want to use it than want to use it and not have it.

Scott´s last blog post..Renaissance Mentality

Ambrose December 24th, 2008 at 9:28 AM

In the financial sense(For WOTC, not my broke ass) I think it’s a fantastic thing for D&D. I found much of the 4e core material wanting for options, and releasing a whole bunch of books to rectify the lack of viable options for certain types of characters makes good financial sense. People will pay for D&D on the cover. Ethical, it is not.

Like if Microsoft were to start charging money for Windows Update, they’d make a lot of money from people who couldn’t give up Windows, and the frustrated users who give it up would be negligible from the standpoint of financial return.

So, keep WOTC well funded and therefore ensure the future of D&D? Sure, it’s good for that.
Keep the end-user satisfied? Not really, unless he buys the extra books.

That’s just my 2 cents.

Ambrose´s last blog post..Superpower House Rules Issue 2: Invulnerability

Soul Existence January 8th, 2009 at 3:52 PM

I voted no.

I have no real fantastic reason. Is it good for WOTC? well, maybe if us gamers are silly enough to buy every freaking book in their book of the month club, yes. financially it is good. but not only 4e, but star wars saga. gah. 2 books in a month? for two different systems that i play? gah!

gah.

Soul Existence´s last blog post..Scum and Villainy

oldNewTimer January 9th, 2009 at 4:59 PM

In the short term, I think its great. Though the only book I’m truly interested in is PHB2.

Dave March 16th, 2009 at 7:32 PM

I think too many options LIMIT choices. You get so caught up in the possibilities, you end up with unbelievable and relatively useless characters and settings.

Face it: the kinds of towns low-level characters are likely to visit/reequip at will NOT respond well to a party of half-dragons, weretigers and Drow necromancers. (For once, can’t people just play a friggin’ elf? And maybe learn the difference between ROLE-playing and ROLL-playing? Monsters are so much more monstrous when you’re not monsters yourself!)

—

As far as the financial benefit to WotC goes, you guys all know you can download the ENTIRE collection of 4e material for free as PDFs, right? Five minutes on BitTorrent and you’re done.

I don’t feel guilty about doing this. The Player’s Handbook I downloaded includes the printer crop margins and color swatches, so I’m pretty sure Wizards uploaded it there themselves — nobody on the outside would have had access to the pre-publication version but them. By making the game ubiquitously available, they again dominate the gaming market. You don’t HAVE to buy the books, but they know most of us will anyway because, for whatever reason, we WANT the hard copies.

Personally, I heard a lot of bad reviews about 4e, so I wasn’t spending any money on it until I found out for myself. Once I read the books, I DID buy the $120 core rules boxed set, simply because I find books easier to use at the table than laptops.