| I prefer the next Open Design rule set to be |
| 3.5 D&D/OGL |
|
42% |
[ 46 ] |
| 4E D&D |
|
37% |
[ 40 ] |
| Modern/Cthulhu |
|
6% |
[ 7 ] |
| Pathfinder Beta |
|
11% |
[ 12 ] |
| True20 |
|
1% |
[ 2 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 107 |
|
| Author |
Message
|
| Alzrius |
 Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2008 1:00 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Patron
Joined: 04 Apr 2008
Posts: 44
|
| Wolfgang wrote: |
| Ultimately, patrons who support the project will decide the issue with their donations. I'll open this project up for patrons in a couple weeks, when the current 4E project goes to the editor. |
I'm glad to hear that this poll won't be the last word in this regard, but I'm a little nervous about the prospect of voting on the edition of the next Open Design project with my wallet. I'm one of those people who wouldn't want to become a patron if the next OD turned out to be 4E, so paying for it before the edition is decided on worries me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Watcher |
| Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2008 1:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
Posts: 1625
Location: Your TARDIS
|
| Alzrius wrote: |
| I'm glad to hear that this poll won't be the last word in this regard, but I'm a little nervous about the prospect of voting on the edition of the next Open Design project with my wallet. I'm one of those people who wouldn't want to become a patron if the next OD turned out to be 4E, so paying for it before the edition is decided on worries me. |
I think if the final determination really made you unhappy, he would refund your money, particularly at the start of the process.
You have to consider, not everyone who has voted is actually going to shell out $25 to $30 bucks for basic patronage. Voting in this poll is free, and for some, that will be the extent of their investment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| terraleon |
| Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2008 1:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Contributor
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 2016
Location: upstate NY
|
If you patronize a project that isn't green-lit, you get refunded unless you want in on the project that was green-lit-- that's how it's worked in the past, and I can't imagine Wolfgang changing it.
-Ben.
_________________
progressio sine timore aut praejudica - Spectemur agendo |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Wolfgang |
| Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2008 2:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Kobold Overlord
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Posts: 4990
Location: The Mines
|
No plan to change the refund policy.
If your preferred edition isn't chosen for the next project, you absolutely will get your cash back. Because why force anyone to participate in a discussion about a game they aren't playing?
_________________
Wolfgang Baur
Publisher, Kobold Press |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Lord Snorkus |
| Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 04 Apr 2008
Posts: 151
Location: Codfish Cape
|
| Although I voted with 3.5 I am a big Pathfinder fan and would support this as well. 4E I would not bother with, even if the fluff was good. Just too many things out there, and not a lot of time to tinker. Same with CoC. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Phil Larwood |
| Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2008 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 15 Mar 2008
Posts: 48
|
I don't know if this is out of the ballpark because it's too damn weird or something. Perhaps it would also make the adventure too long or might be impossible because of the OGL/GSL, but how about:
A fantasy project that gives the GM the choice of running it as 3.5 or 4e? The story and encounters would be the same, but the mechanics would be different depending on whether you wanted to run it 4e or 3.5.
Monte Cook did something similar (to a much lesser extent) with some of his Malhavoc stuff. You would have the stats for the goblins as 4e monsters and then (possibly as a sidebar) the same goblins with their 3.5 stats.
Impossible? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| The Gneech |
| Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2008 5:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 11 Apr 2008
Posts: 8
|
I wish this was checkboxes instead of radio buttons, 'cause I'd like to vote for 3.5E and Cthulhu.
-The Gneech  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bullonir |
| Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 1:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 23 Mar 2008
Posts: 188
|
Uh... Phil?
Hi,
Which Malhavoc project are we talking about?
I have most of the stuff and have NO IDEA what product this could be????
Just curious.
Patrick
PS: Yes, check boxes could be interesting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Arawn76 |
| Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 2:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 03 Oct 2008
Posts: 19
|
I must confess that although I'm a 4e advocate I didn't expect the voting to be this close. 
With respect to KQ forumites but I was of the opinion that the vast majority were anti-4e (not in the OTT way you see on other boards though) and we would only see a handful of 4e votes.
I know the final decision is with cash but I honestly feel now that whether the edition chosen is 4e or 3e the contributors will be good people to work with and learn from. Whilst my cash vote will be 4e, should it go the other way I'll happily move it over rather than be refunded.
Although a mad switch to Modern/Cthulhu would be awesome  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Phil Larwood |
| Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 5:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 15 Mar 2008
Posts: 48
|
| bullonir wrote: |
Uh... Phil?
Hi,
Which Malhavoc project are we talking about?
I have most of the stuff and have NO IDEA what product this could be????
Just curious.
Patrick
PS: Yes, check boxes could be interesting. |
I was talking the least possible changes, such as the replacement feat list for Legacy of Dragons and the damage reduction change (in many of his books). He was the only publisher I could think of from the top of my head. I'll warrant it's nowhere near the same thing, but it's the closest comparison I could get |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Wolfgang |
| Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 6:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Kobold Overlord
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Posts: 4990
Location: The Mines
|
| Arawn76 wrote: |
| With respect to KQ forumites but I was of the opinion that the vast majority were anti-4e (not in the OTT way you see on other boards though) and we would only see a handful of 4e votes. |
I think your view may be based only on some of the KQ group; the Open Design projects have included a full-blown 4E adventure project since June, and there's plenty of support for the system here.
_________________
Wolfgang Baur
Publisher, Kobold Press |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Arawn76 |
| Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 9:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 03 Oct 2008
Posts: 19
|
| Wolfgang wrote: |
| I think your view may be based only on some of the KQ group; the Open Design projects have included a full-blown 4E adventure project since June, and there's plenty of support for the system here. |
Of which I am a fond, if silent patron 
Don't get me wrong, the people here are great. This is a really nice, mature and well spoken community, I was just under the impression that the balance was more 3.5, heavily so. I am pleasantly surprised to see that there are so many 4e fans though.
That aside I'm looking forward to the next OD project now, whatever edition/ruleset. It should be fun  . It'll be nice to see a project from the start. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| deinol |
| Posted: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:23 pm Post subject: system agnostic |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 27 Aug 2008
Posts: 380
|
| I voted for cthulhu, but I'm one of those people who will buy any project that comes through. I own every system listed, and would love to have more quality products for any of them. That said, I think it is too early to do a pathfinder (system) project. The beta is way too temporary. I also wouldn't mind seeing a pathfinder (setting) ogl adventure, if possible. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| phloog |
| Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 5:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 06 Jun 2008
Posts: 4
|
The Pathfinder/3.5 argument (add the two categories to determine real interest) does mesh nicely with my concern about interest versus willingness...specifically;
I would be willing to theorize that the percentage of people who chose Pathfinder but would be 'happy enough' with a 3.5 version, and would have extreme distaste for a 4e version is quite high. I don't know if you could safely add 100% of the PF group to 3.5.
But despite the number of changes (which have turned me off of PF), it is still far closer to 3.5 than 4e. In fact, so close that I could safely say that my poll answer would be "I definitely prefer 3.5, but if you went PF I might still buy in because I know that conversion wouldn't be an ordeal" If you went 4e, the time it would take to convert would likely best be spent writing my own adventures or buying a product for 3.5
The argument for combining the two is fairly strong if you look at it that way...These two groups could use a module created for the other with minimal tweaking, while both groups would be 'out in the cold' if you went 4e.
And frankly, as someone who just started a True20 campaign, if you created it for 3.5 or PF I could fairly quickly make it a T20 module as well, so an argument could be made to combine all groups for which conversion by the DM is no large effort. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| wtripp |
| Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 10:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 20 Mar 2008
Posts: 3
|
I voted for Pathfinder but 3.5 would be awesome too. Just not 4E... please!
Wayne |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
