Convincing 4th Edition players to consider 5th Edition

Pour · Jul 3, 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.

The snark just comes naturally then.

I get businesses want to make money, but the direction of their products goes beyond the universal truth. I see a difference between the advent and intentions of 4e, and the advent and intentions of 5e, very clearly, enough of a difference that I can't quite peg the latter's target audience.

Patryn of Elvenshae · Jul 3, 2012

Stormonu said:
I'd more say they shouldn't try to please one-true-edition fans. Those fans who can't see any value in someone who likes any edition other than their edition of choice. Whether that edition of choice is OD&D, B/X, BECMI, 1E, 2E, 3E, Pathfinder, C&C, OSRIC, Labyrinth Lord or 4E.

This is absolutely, absolutely well-said. (Can't XP you.)

I'd also add that they should not try to please "Nothing from Edition X fans," as well. Or, rather, that I hope they do not work to please them. The obvious sub-group is the "Nothing from 4th Ed" group, but they aren't the only ones.

Harlock · Jul 3, 2012

Pour said:
The snark just comes naturally then.

I get businesses want to make money, but the direction of their products goes beyond the universal truth. I see a difference between the advent and intentions of 4e, and the advent and intentions of 5e, very clearly, enough of a difference that I can't quite peg the latter's target audience.

Well there is something we can discuss! What differences in advent and intention do you see between 4e and 5e? My personal take on the target audience for 5e is that, as any business would, they want to target their key demographic. What that demographic truly is anymore, I am not certain of, but I assure you that WotC has paid as much as they were willing and able for market research to conclude what that demographic is. I get the sense that WotC might feel 4e cost more customers than they were willing to bear, but that is based on my feelings and observations about such an early and open playtest of the next edition and the impression that they want to win back some of who they lost.

SKyOdin · Jul 3, 2012

Tony Vargas said:
Nod. The hardest of the hard-core edition-warriors aren't going anywhere. They're staying with 3.5 or Pathfinder or pre-Essentials 4e or post-UA AD&D or whatever it is they've become calcified in. They've never been part of the potential target audience.

That said, 4e is the most recent crop of D&D fans, and it's only been out 4 years, so it's not likely that a whole lot of them have become set in their ways and edition-insistent, after all, they've made the switch to every new edition, they have a record as 'adopters.'

Ironically, that's /also/ an argument for not trying to please 4e fans at all.

Huh?

That last sentence doesn't make any sense. The only way I can think of that does make sense is that you are implying that: "those 4E fans who are not die-hard edition fans are the sorts who would buy any old piece of garbage anyways, so there is no need to actually put design effort into the game". Which would be a fairly stupid and insulting insinuation. So, I will give you the benefit of the doubt and ask that you clarify what the heck you are talking about.

What exactly is an argument for not trying to please 4e fans?

Crazy Jerome · Jul 3, 2012

Patryn of Elvenshae said:
This is absolutely, absolutely well-said. (Can't XP you.)

I'd also add that they should not try to please "Nothing from Edition X fans," as well. Or, rather, that I hope they do not work to please them. The obvious sub-group is the "Nothing from 4th Ed" group, but they aren't the only ones.

If they try to please any of those groups, they'll lose other people. Like me, for example. Oh, I'll probably buy the core rules and try them a bit, but I won't be active with it, and I certainly won't be buying lots of product so construed.

Neonchameleon · Jul 3, 2012

shadow said:
However, for me and many people D&D is a role-playing game rather than a tactical miniatures game.
...
When I play, I want to get into an adventure story rather than having to worry about using the right tactical option at the right time during combat. I don't want to be overwhelmed by the sheer amount of "powers" my fighter has to pick from during combat.

I am so sorry you find a game that focusses in the most intense few minutes PCs live through in any given day gets in the way of your roleplaying. And that you find adding restrictions and conditions imposed by the world and the bad guys and trying to overcome them apparently makes it impossible for you to tell your story. Me, I find incorporating the sort of limits you have to overcome in a life or death situation actually adds colour and texture to the story, and laying out in detail what my character will do when the rubber meets the road helps me add depth to them.

I can of course roleplay without this and do in many systems. But I am sorry you have problems with this range. However if you try to dismiss 4e as a tactical minatures game, this says precisely one thing. That you simply do not have the relevant skill to use the depth and colour 4e adds to life or death situations to assist your roleplaying.

If on the other hand you don't like 4e because you don't like the focus, that is another story. But there is precisely one thing that calling 4e a tactical minatures game reflects on. And that is your skill at roleplaying.

And I'm sorry you can't express what you want to bring across without barely veiled insults at other people's playstyle. Don't be rude. - Lwaxy

Imaro said:
On a side note... I have noticed that it can be hard to downright impossible to get fans of 4e to accept that for some (in the same way some people don't enjoy chess) 4e's (and to a much lesser extent 3e's) focus on grid-based, tactical combat isn't fun for them...

I have no problem with this. What I have a problem understanding is the idea that a hacked tabletop wargame that in at least one edition gives measurements in inches (every bit as glaring as 4e's squares) is a good system to use for such people. If the objections to 4e's tactical combat came from fans of e.g. the Cortex or FATE systems, I'd understand it.

IMO, 4e really does force too much time to be spent on combat

Here I'll agree - although will point out that part of that is sucky modules and another part is Encounters.

Lord Mhoram said:
But there are some different assumptions in the specific situation here -

In a solo game having an uberpowerful character doesn't really matter as there are no other party members to share the spotlight with.

Sorry. I was unclear there. I said that the problem was that you were only about a quarter as strong and tough as a combined party would be. This presents an obvious solution, no? Take a striker, and multiply everything by four. (Personally I'd rather take an squad in - using the simpler classes in Essentials for the sidekicks).

Steely_Dan said:
Yes, I don't want to drive a Volvo: "look out for me, I'm in a safe car!"

How about a Range Rover "Look out for me. I'm in a car that won't break down." Care to race me across the desert? Or offroad over mountains? Or do you want to stick to your nice round ovals and nice safe city streets? While I'm busy enjoying the scenery in Africa.

Libramarian · Jul 3, 2012

Clearly 4e is the edition least like the others, and with the highest proportion of fans who dislike all other editions, so if you're looking at audience triage in order to turn the ridiculous goal of uniting all the editions into the more feasible goal of uniting most of the editions, then that's the first group you should exclude.

I mean if you look at the discussions in this forum the difference between the opinions of 4e fans and pre-4e fans is as clear as day.

There should be a 4e clone if there isn't already one.

Bedrockgames · Jul 3, 2012

Some people imple don't like the 4E combat system. Others find it a bit lengthy which they feel interferes with other aspects of the game. Lots of us just don't like that the system is balanced around it. These are opinions and preferences. Holding them isn't a threat to anyone, nor are they indicative of a lack of gaming or RP skill.

Harlock · Jul 3, 2012

Bedrockgames said:
Some people imple don't like the 4E combat system. Others find it a bit lengthy which they feel interferes with other aspects of the game. Lots of us just don't like that the system is balanced around it. These are opinions and preferences. Holding them isn't a threat to anyone, nor are they indicative of a lack of gaming or RP skill.

I can't XP you, but you know being reasonable is like, against the internet rules, right?

In the end, 4e players will be convinced or not. Some may give 5e a fair shot. Some may simply read the rules and assume they won't fit their playstyle and never try it. Truth is, nothing we say can really convince anyone of anything. The game, or rather the edition, must speak for itself. Speaking for myself, I can say those times when I have demanded my wants be met while maintaining a closed mind, I have been most disappointed. When I've kept an open mind, more often than not, I am pleasantly surprised. Doubtless your (general you) mileage may and does vary, as that is merely human experience!

Minigiant · Jul 3, 2012

Libramarian said:
Clearly 4e is the edition least like the others, and with the highest proportion of fans who dislike all other editions, so if you're looking at audience triage in order to turn the ridiculous goal of uniting all the editions into the more feasible goal of uniting most of the editions, then that's the first group you should exclude.

I mean if you look at the discussions in this forum the difference between the opinions of 4e fans and pre-4e fans is as clear as day.

There should be a 4e clone if there isn't already one.

I actually don't think the differences between pre-4E editions and 4E are not as far as some claim.

In fact, if the core and the 4E mods, 3E mods, 2E mods, and 1E mods are all designed at once; the many aspects of the various editions could be included in the game to many 4th, 3rd, 2nd, and 1st edition fans happy.

It just has to be done right.