General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
3E/OGL was ambitious and inclusive to the point it was harming the core game. Running a stereotypical D&D game became a struggle.
I disagree with this statement as much as is humanly possible.
__________________ It was one of those nights when you turn out the lights, and everything comes into view
The combat system should be based on the world design. The world design should not be based on the combat system.
My 4 year old ties a towel to her shoulders and pretends to be a superhero. Roleplaying is not between the covers of a book.
As an extension of that, if you tell me that any game is the same just because you roleplay the same, then as far as I am concerned, you don't get the point.
"I just want D&D to run smoothly, palpate my gamer gland, and bring the metal." - A 4E fan
"I've got to have all that, but I require intelligent conversation as well." - Me
The effective stance would be to sell it like McD, saying "Have it your way." WotC could sell the core books for whatever the new edition is in store, but make the old editions available through POD for those who just aren't satisfied or don't want change.
but "Have it your way" only applies to items on the menu. You're not going into McD and getting a skirt steak no matter how much you insist it's 'your way."
As I said before, this have it your way approach waters down the game. 3E/OGL was ambitious and inclusive to the point it was harming the core game. Running a stereotypical D&D game became a struggle.
I'm trying to understand how it would water down the game? If WotC sells current edition, in this case 4e, in stores only and older editions via POD there is no conflict? The current core material such as PHB, DMG, MM, and <insert campaign name> Player's Guide is available to the public and marketed to those who want the "new hotness" and still leaves older stuff available for those players who want it.
Having the actual campaign book neutral in respects to the mechanics allows the base product to appeal to not just new edition players but older edition players as well. Currently the logic of most players is, "why should I pay for a campaign book that has a large portion of material I don't want?" A neutral campaign suddenly opens that market up as WotC can sell not only the 4e Player's guide but could provide a guide for past editions as well as licensing it out for other game conversions.
As I mentioned, Green Ronin's Freeport is a perfect working example of a neutral campaign. Currently there are guides for 3e, True20, Mutants & Masterminds, C&C, to name a few and a 4e guide is supposedly in the works via license.
__________________ DM4Hire
"What doesn't kill you will probably turn you into a vampire, a werewolf, or a zombie." - Myself
"This is Sky Captain. I'm on my way." - Joe "Sky Captain" Sullivan
30-40% conversion rate? Are you being serious? After a little over a year, I'd say the conversion rate is about 75%-80%, with new and returning players more than making up the difference. Thats all speculation, but 30-40% is a bit ridiculous.
It's all anecdotal. Of the 19 people I game with regularly, 2 are in ongoing 4e games. Does that mean the conversion rate is only 10%?
Its funny to me. A year ago (around the release) I predicted that Goodman would probably do alright because good and ready to run modules fit exactly with the easy-to-prep, simple-to-play game approach. But I didn't think other kinds of 3PP would resonate with the 4E fan base. Not enough for market viability.
I think that's nonsense.
If Green Ronin produced the Book of Fiends right out the gate and if Creature Catalog hit right out the gate alongside Tome of Horrors, those books would have sold.
Part of the 'real' problem is that WoTC, even with the OGL, still controlled the market by being the big dog. If it shakes, the fleas fall off. Those companies that conintue to do well do so on brand recognition, individual name recognition, and by getting away from WoTC d20 system and making their own OGL variants. Green Ronin mentioned dozens, if not hundreds of times, along with others, that when 3.5 came along, it killed their catalog sales.
I don't recall 3PP all branding together and vowing to fight 3.5 by sticking to the OGL that most closely resembled 3.0.
Instead they get it in the sack, puked, and picked up the pieces.
Those that had strong name recognition were able to weather the storm. Those that had strong name recognition and wanted to be more than just a 3PP saw the writing on the wall. If WoTC could do it once, they could do it again. (And they did with 4e.)
It's much more than... 'merely' certain styles of books not being a good fit for 4e in my opinion.
I think that given the economy, and lack of non-Goodman 4E 3pp FLGS enthusiasm, and the lapse in time since the last Necromancer product, that getting a new Necro 4E product onto game store shelves and selling it, would be a full time job.
Clack and Co. have full time jobs. So they'd rather write stuff that will sell with less effort on the selling side.
There was a time when Necromancer products sold themselves. Now Clark & Co. have to select the niches where that is still true.
__________________ ENworld OAF (Old-school Admirer of 4th edition)
As I mentioned, Green Ronin's Freeport is a perfect working example of a neutral campaign. Currently there are guides for 3e, True20, Mutants & Masterminds, C&C, to name a few and a 4e guide is supposedly in the works via license.
But Green Ronin isn't doing it. This is important. They're not doing ANY generic books this year. This indicates to me that it's not a runaway success. This is probably more true of people who play several game systems. If you run C&C and D&D3e and D&D4e, how many of the mechanical sourcebooks are you going to buy?
The fact that Green Ronin hasn't continued making system neutral games to me, argues that it's not as profitible as making specific system supplements such as Mutants & Masterminds or A Game of Thrones.
Well if you look at it properly they have done a new True20 product and it's inclusion in Warriors & Warlocks for M&M is also a product placement. Green Ronin is still doing stuff for it, but the campaign is still neutral and therefore doesn't need them to continue. Basically they tossed out the book into the middle of the ring and said have at it. We're sticking with our products but anyone is welcome to take a shot at doing products for it. C&C and the forth coming 4e books shows that others are stepping up to the plate and taking a shot.
As for my McD analogy I think of it more as WotC is the current owners of the chain. It's up to them what stays on the menu and what comes off. Right now there are a lot of customers that want older stuff to come back onto the menu and they should take advantage of that, even if it would only be special orders.
__________________ DM4Hire
"What doesn't kill you will probably turn you into a vampire, a werewolf, or a zombie." - Myself
"This is Sky Captain. I'm on my way." - Joe "Sky Captain" Sullivan
While I most certainly dont think its a 50-50 split, or even a 60-40 split, I highly doubt also its barely 5% either.....
Perhaps fragmented is a better word.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shemeska
When the idea of only a 30-40% conversion rate from 3e to 4e gets tossed around, it's not a stretch to think that the fanbase is split quite a bit. Gaining enough new people to make up for that sort of fragmentation is the question, and I can only speculate if WotC is doing so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BryonD
Clearly my personal experience is not a good representation. But my experience is that it is far greater than 5%.
That is not to say that it is pure loss. Obviously 4E also gained a significant number of fans that did not play 3E. So on total number of players the lost 3E players will very much overstate the net fan base impact.
However, when we are specifically talking about comparing 3PP popularity from 3E to 4E, it isn't just total numbers that matter, but the people who make up those numbers and their gaming style that is important.
3E was built as a complex game. And it was also built in parallel with the OGL. I suspect the two were pretty much fully independent, but at a minimum the spirit of that type of gaming was at the forefront and the knowledge of this connection was present.
Of course there will be exceptions (and I think anyone who posts on ENWorld is to some extent an exception by definition), but the 4E fan base, taken as a collective, is less inclined to want more complications in their game than the 3E fan base, taken as a whole collective. 3PP products are often perceived as a complication.
The whole 3PP thing was on very thin ice to begin with for 4E because it is in conflict with the marketing philosophy of the game's very core.
Of course, WotC then vastly botched the GSL and figuring out which fatal blow killed the victim first may be impossible.
Its funny to me. A year ago (around the release) I predicted that Goodman would probably do alright because good and ready to run modules fit exactly with the easy-to-prep, simple-to-play game approach. But I didn't think other kinds of 3PP would resonate with the 4E fan base. Not enough for market viability.
Just for the record, I do not think either that the "split" is 95-5. I was merely exaggerating in order to find out what was meant by "the fanbase is split", because it sounded to me as if it was an (ballpark) 50-50 split that was implied, which I thought was a bit odd.
__________________
360 hours played
Gnoguh, human fighter/cleric (kensei->adamantine soldier)
Carric, elf cleric/ranger (radiant servant->saint)
Torn, tiefling wizard/cleric (divine oracle->sages of ages)
Truxas, human feylock/bard (feytouched->feyliege)
Tagron, human rogue (daggermaster->deadly trickster) 22nd level Musings of an Epic Virgin
Well if you look at it properly they have done a new True20 product and it's inclusion in Warriors & Warlocks for M&M is also a product placement. Green Ronin is still doing stuff for it, but the campaign is still neutral and therefore doesn't need them to continue. Basically they tossed out the book into the middle of the ring and said have at it. We're sticking with our products but anyone is welcome to take a shot at doing products for it. C&C and the forth coming 4e books shows that others are stepping up to the plate and taking a shot.
As for my McD analogy I think of it more as WotC is the current owners of the chain. It's up to them what stays on the menu and what comes off. Right now there are a lot of customers that want older stuff to come back onto the menu and they should take advantage of that, even if it would only be special orders.
Yeah, and a lot of customer's want the McLean back on the menu too.
It's a nice daydream, but WoTC isn't even selling it's current in print books via PDF/POD. Why would they model two business systems when they don't have to?
But Green Ronin isn't doing it. This is important. They're not doing ANY generic books this year. This indicates to me that it's not a runaway success. This is probably more true of people who play several game systems. If you run C&C and D&D3e and D&D4e, how many of the mechanical sourcebooks are you going to buy?
The fact that Green Ronin hasn't continued making system neutral games to me, argues that it's not as profitible as making specific system supplements such as Mutants & Masterminds or A Game of Thrones.
Eh, I don't have any numbers but I expect the statless Pirate's Guide was a huge success. It has tons of support from GR. I expect very few would buy a C&C or a 3rd Era or a 4e Freeport rules support book without first having the Freeport book itself.
Statless seems suited for story and flavor element things so settings are a natural and their cult and NPC description books seem like good fits as well but some types of products do much better with rules material: splats, adventures, monsters, NPCs you expect to enter combat, etc.
3e fans will get more 3pp support than 4e fans, because 3E fans buy 3PP product.
There has been some 4E 3PP. And far to few 4E fans bought it.
And the reason why (and I think many people are still not seriously considering) is the char builder. Unless a 3PP's stuff becomes part of the char builder, you're going to find many more DMs just saying "no" to 3rd party products even if the GSL had been a verbatim copy of the OGL.
And the reason why (and I think many people are still not seriously considering) is the char builder. Unless a 3PP's stuff becomes part of the char builder, you're going to find many more DMs just saying "no" to 3rd party products even if the GSL had been a verbatim copy of the OGL.
I'm not seeing this as much of a problem as believed. DDI doesn't seem to have the following it's believed to have and seems to be losing more daily. Course it's hard to prove or refute as we'll never see the numbers. I only know of about four players out of the twenty or so players I game with admit to using it. That may change but then again it might not.
__________________ DM4Hire
"What doesn't kill you will probably turn you into a vampire, a werewolf, or a zombie." - Myself
"This is Sky Captain. I'm on my way." - Joe "Sky Captain" Sullivan
Not to beat a dead horse, but 4e doesn't allow Clark to "tell the kinds of stories he wants to tell."
He's not publishing to make a living, he's doing it because he enjoys the game. 4e just doesn't "do it" for Clark, so it's easy for him to give it a pass.
There's not a lack of business acumen, there's a lack of enthusiasm.
(Blithely putting words in Clark's mouth despite the fact I know he's right here...)
None of that is included in his reasons. He gives his reasons in the OP, and it's not "I don't like 4e". I think you might have him confused with Paizo. Clark has had enthusiasm for 4e. He has plenty of stories he wants to tell through 4e apparently.
Eh, I don't have any numbers but I expect the statless Pirate's Guide was a huge success. It has tons of support from GR. I expect very few would buy a C&C or a 3rd Era or a 4e Freeport rules support book without first having the Freeport book itself.
Statless seems suited for story and flavor element things so settings are a natural and their cult and NPC description books seem like good fits as well but some types of products do much better with rules material: splats, adventures, monsters, NPCs you expect to enter combat, etc.
So it was such a huge success that they haven't made any other systemless settings?
Strange. When some companies find something that's highly profitible, they continue doing it.
Green Ronin has tons of books for settings that could get this style treatment ranging form their elf setting to the isle of psionicists (that got kicked in the neitherregions by the 3.5 switch), to book of the righteous. That they haven't speaks volumes.
Unless I'm way off base, companies don't go, "you know, while we'd sell thousands more of this book, let's instead do this one."
I dunno. Building 3rd party extensibility into the DDI seems to me to much more of a better mousetrap than one which only gets input from WotC. Isn't that a key part of digital initiatives -- to harness the vast power of the online market?
I'd love to see DDI expandable to encompass 3p products. Perhaps with a product key included with a hardcopy of a book. I don't think it's going to happen, but I'd love to see it happen.
Again, wouldn't the biggest obstacle for 3PP be the total lack of support on the char builder?
Seriously, look at the online 4e games and they seem to ALWAYS say "char builder-legal". Moreso than the GSL, this is what kills off 3PP support IMO.
Not sure that is the biggest obstacle, but it is the one most focused on new 3P classes or powers. I told Scott I thought the Character Builder was great. In a perfect world (which we dont live in) I'd love to see an open plug in for people to create homebrew content (or 3P content) that they could plug into CharBuilder. That would solve that problem
__________________ Clark Peterson
Necromancer Games
www.necromancergames.com
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
