Convincing 4th Edition players to consider 5th Edition

Fifth Element · Jul 2, 2012

Imaro said:
And this has what to do with my side note??

Okay, so the part you're missing is that we're really responding to your stated support of bedrockbrendan's comment (can't XP you etc), which supported the poster who said that 4E was not an RPG by trying to explain away the insult by assuming the poster meant something else. Then you go on to claim that 4E fans just won't accept that some people don't like tactical combat. It's a strawman, because the comment causing the problem is not "I don't like tactical combat" but "4E is not an RPG."

Harlock said:
In other words, I'll give every edition a chance because I am a fan and not some fair weather gamer.

That's not a fair characterization. Someone who's happy with their chosen edition of the game should not be derided for being happy with their chosen edition.

I guess it depends on what you mean by giving a new edition "a chance". If you mean "buy the core game and play it for a while", then it's reasonable to not do that if you're content with your current game. If instead you mean "look into the rules etc to see if it might be to your liking", then it should be non-controversial to say everyone should give it a chance in that sense.

Harlock · Jul 2, 2012

Pour said:
(which we already own).

That, my friends, is what we refer to in the business, as a clue. That 4e has been released and is out there and is available is in itself reason enough for Hasbro to want the sales surge of a new edition. They are a business and businesses do indeed exist to make money, after all. I'm not saying this to be snarky, just pointing out why 4e ever got released itself. And why eventually, 6e will come along as well.

Campbell · Jul 2, 2012

Harlock said:
Let's continue on with that then. Isn't the strength of 4e for these people enough alone to convince them to at least try 5e? I know I have bought and played every edition of D&D since 1981. Certainly I have enjoyed some more than others, but the fact that I am a fan of D&D generally is enough to convince me to buy a new edition and hope for the best as I play it and learn the system. In other words, I'll give every edition a chance because I am a fan and not some fair weather gamer.

Personally, I'm not really a fan of D&D from a general standpoint. As time goes on I find that I am increasingly not a fan of the game's central conceits - amoral treasure hunters, character defining magic items, engaging in prolonged sojourns to a mythical underworld, multiple encounters a day being the norm, Diablo/WoW style random loot drips. I like 4e because it allows me to play and run games that get away from those conceits. I get that the sort of play I prefer might not be the principle concern of D&D Next's designers, but until they show that my preferences will be supported in a way that is different and/or superior to what I have available to me I see no reason to buy into Next, especially when what I've seen from WotC seems to indicate that the elements of the game I like might be on the outs come the next iteration of the play test.

This ain't personal to me. I look at editions of D&D like completely separate games. Honestly I probably wouldn't post nearly as much as I do if I didn't find discussing RPGs a fun hobby all on its own.

Harlock · Jul 2, 2012

Fifth Element said:
That's not a fair characterization. Someone who's happy with their chosen edition of the game should not be derided for being happy with their chosen edition.

I guess it depends on what you mean by giving a new edition "a chance". If you mean "buy the core game and play it for a while", then it's reasonable to not do that if you're content with your current game. If instead you mean "look into the rules etc to see if it might be to your liking", then it should be non-controversial to say everyone should give it a chance in that sense.

If you take that quote out of context and ignore what preceded it, I can see your point.

Upper_Krust · Jul 2, 2012

Hey Lord Mhoram!

Lord Mhoram said:
Thanks for the answers but Krust had the right of it.

You know you can trust in Krust! B-)

The point of my approach is that the wife can grab the module read it once, and play it as written with maybe a few adjustments on the fly. All the modification is on the character, not the modules (lots less work for her).

Exactly. Keep It Simple. 4E is all about helping to make the DM's life easier.

...such advice would have been nice if applied to the rules bloated PC classes of course - but you can't have everything I guess.

Harlock · Jul 2, 2012

Campbell said:
Personally, I'm not really a fan of D&D from a general standpoint. As time goes on I find that I am increasingly not a fan of the game's central conceits - amoral treasure hunters, character defining magic items, engaging in prolonged sojourns to a mythical underworld, multiple encounters a day being the norm, Diablo/WoW style random loot drips. I like 4e because it allows me to play and run games that get away from those conceits. I get that the sort of play I prefer might not be the principle concern of D&D Next's designers, but until they show that my preferences will be supported in a way that is different and/or superior to what I have available to me I see no reason to buy into Next, especially when what I've seen from WotC seems to indicate that the elements of the game I like might be on the outs come the next iteration of the play test.

This ain't personal to me. I look at editions of D&D like completely separate games. Honestly I probably wouldn't post nearly as much as I do if I didn't find discussing RPGs a fun hobby all on its own.

It sucks, but you may not be the target audience of 5e then. Not that 4e is bad, but it is, for better or worse, just like every previous and every forseeable future edition of D&D, going to be replaced. I am willing to give it a chance, but hey, that's just like my opinion.

Bedrockgames · Jul 2, 2012

Harlock said:
That, my friends, is what we refer to in the business, as a clue. That 4e has been released and is out there and is available is in itself reason enough for Hasbro to want the sales surge of a new edition. They are a business and businesses do indeed exist to make money, after all. I'm not saying this to be snarky, just pointing out why 4e ever got released itself. And why eventually, 6e will come along as well.

But I think the edition treadmill is proving to be a failed model. At least the way wotc has handled edition transitions. They cant risk splitting the fanbase with each release of a new edition. They are a publisher and do need to sell books. I think the problem may be that they are expecting too much from such a small industry. They can certainly release new editions, but the first aim has to be retaining all the customers you currently have. How many more editions can they release before competitors eat up all their lapsed customers? This is why they are ven doing the "one edition to rule them all" thing in the first place. They are not the undisputed top dog anymore. And I think it is directly tied to their approach of cranking out new editions (It reminds me of the Gary Jackson board room meetings from knodt).

Yes, they are a business. Yes, businesses should try to make money. But angering your customers is a bad way to achieve that goal (especially in a small pool like the rpg community). I think a lot of people strongly dislike the new edition every four-five years (i know when 3.5 came out os soon after 3e, it really bothered me).

Fifth Element · Jul 2, 2012

Harlock said:
If you take that quote out of context and ignore what preceded it, I can see your point.

Hold on there, chief, the context was that you would buy any new edition put out by WotC now and play it for a while. You then proceed to say it's because you're not a fair weather gamer, which of course implies that anyone who doesn't automatically buy the game is, a term which is not complimentary.

As I said, that's not fair. Just because someone likes 4E does not mean they should be spending money on 5E. Find out about it, see what it's about, because it might just be more to your tastes than 4E? Absolutely, if you're a fan of what WotC has done with D&D it would be strange to not even find out what they're doing with it now. Lay down hard cash for it, just because it says "Dungeons & Dragons" on the cover? Doing so, or not doing so, is a personal value judgment and says nothing about you as a gamer.

Harlock · Jul 2, 2012

Fifth Element said:
Hold on there, chief, the context was that you would buy any new edition put out by WotC now and play it for a while. You then proceed to say it's because you're not a fair weather gamer, which of course implies that anyone who doesn't automatically buy the game is, a term which is not complimentary.

As I said, that's not fair. Just because someone likes 4E does not mean they should be spending money on 5E. Find out about it, see what it's about, because it might just be more to your tastes than 4E? Absolutely, if you're a fan of what WotC has done with D&D it would be strange to not even find out what they're doing with it now. Lay down hard cash for it, just because it says "Dungeons & Dragons" on the cover? Doing so, or not doing so, is a personal value judgment and says nothing about you as a gamer.

Well, "chief", life isn't fair. Buy a helmet. I can make value judgements based upon my own perspective. It's called an opinion. I have them and so do you.

n00bdragon · Jul 2, 2012

Bedrockgames said:
But I think the edition treadmill is proving to be a failed model. At least the way wotc has handled edition transitions. They cant risk splitting the fanbase with each release of a new edition. They are a publisher and do need to sell books. I think the problem may be that they are expecting too much from such a small industry. They can certainly release new editions, but the first aim has to be retaining all the customers you currently have. How many more editions can they release before competitors eat up all their lapsed customers? This is why they are ven doing the "one edition to rule them all" thing in the first place. They are not the undisputed top dog anymore. And I think it is directly tied to their approach of cranking out new editions (It reminds me of the Gary Jackson board room meetings from knodt).

Yes, they are a business. Yes, businesses should try to make money. But angering your customers is a bad way to achieve that goal (especially in a small pool like the rpg community). I think a lot of people strongly dislike the new edition every four-five years (i know when 3.5 came out os soon after 3e, it really bothered me).

I don't really see splitting the base as a problem. If the internet can teach anything it's that different people have nigh irreconcilable differences in what they prefer and why. If WotC was up front about the fact that they were making a "retro" edition out of 5e and said "Don't worry 4e fans. We'll be back with something slick and modern in 6e, but right now we're doing this." I'd be okay with that. But instead they keep chanting this increasingly hollow mantra of "This will be the edition for everyone."

They need to pick an audience for the product and aim squarely at it. Haters gonna hate so you might as well make exactly what that audience wants to see and not worry about trying to force the people who hate broccoli to eat broccoli.