D&D Next (5E) A Modest Proposal to Unify the Fanbase without D&D Next - Page 8




+ Log in or register to post
Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 99
  1. #71
    Why is asking for reprints of (essentially) 1e/2e a bad idea? That's all I have played all these years. I playtested 5e and liked the direction it was heading. Much like you I find 3.x / 4 not to my tastes for the same reasons you implied.

    I may or may not switch to 5e, but at the very least it will - if it continues to maintain the current design path - occupy some of my play time. Trying to let the 1e/2e editions fade away won't work as they'll just get rehashed via OGL or some other method.

 

  • #72
    Registered User
    Magsman (Lvl 14)

    Fifth Element's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Fredericton, NB, Canada
    Posts
    6,040

    Ignore Fifth Element
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Vargas View Post
    Yeah, but what are we going to do, buy an illegal (under the GSL) retro-clone?
    I'd suspect a legal (under the OGL) - but very time-consuming to develop - retro-clone.

  • #73
    Hm?

    Goes back to playing AD&D...
    BIG COLLABORATIVE DUNGEON PROJECT! SIGN UP AND ADD A ROOM!

    http://www.thedelversdungeon.com/images/tdd1.gif

    Parenthetically, photostat copies of the manuscript rules were made, and when the commercial game was published, fans not willing or financially unable to expend the princely sum of $10 for the product did likewise, copying the material on school (mainly college/university) machines. We were well aware of this, and many gamers who had spent their hard-earned money to buy the game were more irate than we were. In all, though, the 'pirate' material was more helpful that not. Many new fans were made by DMs who were using such copies to run their games. - Gary Gygax

  • #74
    Registered User
    Magsman (Lvl 14)

    Vyvyan Basterd's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Antioch, IL
    Posts
    3,028

    Ignore Vyvyan Basterd
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Vargas View Post
    I'd expect Paizo to have lower overhead, but WotC to have greater economies of scale, so it's possible, but hard to say.
    Economies of scale are exactly the reason 1000 books sold by Paizo and by WotC are not equal. WotC needs to print well more than 1000 books to leverage their scale, so if they only sell 1000 books, they have more sunk costs that sit idle. A smaller company pays more per unit, but less overhead and could remain within their profit needs for the same number of books sold.

    Quote Originally Posted by HoolMarshes Dweller View Post
    Why is asking for reprints of (essentially) 1e/2e a bad idea?
    Most (if not all) are not arguing against 1e/2e reprints. Many of us enjoyed them. What's considered a bad idea by most in this thread is WotC trying to produce new material for OD&D, BECMI/Rules Cyclopedia, 1E, 2E, 3E and 4E concurrently.
    WotBS: Adrana's Diary

    "Pudding!" - Dean Winchester, Supernatural

    Proud Rouseketeers Member-Badge #33

  • #75
    Quote Originally Posted by pogre View Post
    I'm very much looking forward to 5e. I understand the distress some 4e folks have at the direction of Next. I played WFRP for 11 years and went through 4 or 5 years with an unsupported game. It's possible, it's fun, but it is a little tougher.

    From WOTC perspective I would wager their thought process is something like this for reunification:

    Number of Paizo folks + Number of legacy D&D players is much greater than the number of 4e players. Therefore, the new game to reunify D&D players would lean towards those rulesets.

    That's my W.A.G., but I do understand why some 4e players feel abandoned.
    If that's what WotC is thinking then their business planning people are quite literally incompetent and WotC D&D deserves to fail. What they need to compare is Number of Paizo folks who are unhappy enough with Paizo or who have enough desire for the D&D name to want to switch + Number of legacy D&D players who want to play a new game and are unhappy with their current one.

    Paizo is better than WotC at what Paizo does - and to even think of counting the number of Paizo folks as a target market means you must be able to produce a better enough product to tear the Paizo fans away from WotC despite them all having turned away from WotC.

    Legacy D&D players - a potential market too. But WotC have already had a huge try at that market - it was called 3.0.

    Number of 4e players = number of people not currently playing a competing game and therefore fairly easy for WotC to get at. There are many ways to make a superior product than 4e - and 4e fans are people currently looking reflexively at WotC rather than people WotC will need to go out and get. So all else being equal, it would be much easier to get 4e players to play 5e than non-4e players.

    However things aren't all equal. WotC has two bases that aren't really looking at them and they'd need serious work to convert, and the one base that needs little work they are actively pissing off.

    Quote Originally Posted by thedungeondelver View Post
    Hm?

    Goes back to playing AD&D...
    Case in point Current AD&D players are happy with AD&D. Current Pathfinder players are happy with Pathfinder (and supplements are still coming out). Current 4e players are not happy with the plan for 5e.

  • #76
    Registered User
    Guide (Lvl 11)

    Chris_Nightwing's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Basel, Switzerland
    Posts
    1,451

    Ignore Chris_Nightwing
    Quote Originally Posted by Neuroglyph View Post
    I love 4E too, but I don't see Next anything like a replacement for it as you seem to, and I'm sorry, but the mechanics don't feel all that elegant to me. I ran playtests with two different 4E groups and they hated Next - and frankly, after about 3-4 sessions, so did I.

    And one of the propositions I put forward in my petition was a revamping of 4E, to smooth off some of those rough edges. Even I admit it was a far from perfect edition. Honestly, I'd instantly re-purchase a streamlined 4.5E revised game, combining Core and Essentials material with strongly edited, before I'd ever buy a 2e/3e slipshod retro-clone with a few houserules tucked onto it.
    I've said it before, and here I will say it again. You're comparing a first playtest to a game that's had a few years work. From your last sentence alone I would declare you a hostile witness.

    People were upset when 3.5 was no longer supported - another company made a small industry out of it. If the loss of 4E provokes the same response, no doubt someone will cater for your tastes. You'd better hope you're in a sizable crowd there though, rather than a vocal minority.
    Everyone is weird, but those who are weird in the same way call themselves normal.

  • #77
    Registered User
    Guide (Lvl 11)

    Chris_Nightwing's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Basel, Switzerland
    Posts
    1,451

    Ignore Chris_Nightwing
    Quote Originally Posted by Neonchameleon View Post
    If that's what WotC is thinking then their business planning people are quite literally incompetent and WotC D&D deserves to fail. What they need to compare is Number of Paizo folks who are unhappy enough with Paizo or who have enough desire for the D&D name to want to switch + Number of legacy D&D players who want to play a new game and are unhappy with their current one.

    Paizo is better than WotC at what Paizo does - and to even think of counting the number of Paizo folks as a target market means you must be able to produce a better enough product to tear the Paizo fans away from WotC despite them all having turned away from WotC.

    Legacy D&D players - a potential market too. But WotC have already had a huge try at that market - it was called 3.0.

    Number of 4e players = number of people not currently playing a competing game and therefore fairly easy for WotC to get at. There are many ways to make a superior product than 4e - and 4e fans are people currently looking reflexively at WotC rather than people WotC will need to go out and get. So all else being equal, it would be much easier to get 4e players to play 5e than non-4e players.

    However things aren't all equal. WotC has two bases that aren't really looking at them and they'd need serious work to convert, and the one base that needs little work they are actively pissing off.

    Case in point Current AD&D players are happy with AD&D. Current Pathfinder players are happy with Pathfinder (and supplements are still coming out). Current 4e players are not happy with the plan for 5e.
    Actually, if WotC's business plan is to only pick up players unhappy with other systems then they will go bankrupt. It's clear they intend to poach players back from rival (indeed even their own old) systems. The market is a lot more flexible than you think - just look at the number of posters who have said on these forums that they will probably pick up a copy of 5E to see what it's like.

    What they hope is that the number of converts they can grab from current 4E players plus current Pathfinder players plus players plus any new players that will naturally pick up a 'new' edition over any others.. (breath) ..is larger than the number of current 4E players they can hold on to.

    I think they made such a great leap from 3.5 to 4 in terms of style and gameplay that they found themselves in the *wrong* market, as far as they were concerned. They want something with larger mass appeal, and if it's true that Paizo is selling more than WotC, clearly they are in the minority market. They hope to get back into the majority market - a bit like when a political party loses an election (ok, not in the US), they can either realign to the centre or current politics or drift further to their left/right wing. The question is, will 5E appeal to the majority of the market, or are they trying to capture a minority again (be it 4E or old-school players)?
    Everyone is weird, but those who are weird in the same way call themselves normal.

  • #78
    Registered User
    Myrmidon (Lvl 10)

    drothgery's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    10,235
    Blog Entries
    3

    Ignore drothgery
    Quote Originally Posted by Vyvyan Basterd View Post
    Most (if not all) are not arguing against 1e/2e reprints. Many of us enjoyed them. What's considered a bad idea by most in this thread is WotC trying to produce new material for OD&D, BECMI/Rules Cyclopedia, 1E, 2E, 3E and 4E concurrently.
    Well, reprints of 3.x-era stuff (where WotC has source files) are bit different than reprints of older TSR stuff (which may not even have been created digitally, and even if it was and WotC has the files, it probably was in an obsolete format). I'd argue putting any major effort into producing reprints is a bad idea.
    Dave Rothgery

    PBP
    Spoiler:

    My EnWorld Blog
    Republic and Empire
    Buffverse M&M game

    Characters
    Active
    Sanne Bacher d'Lyrandar in S@squ@tch's Against the Giants - Team Black

    Inactive
    Istara Kandorian in Ankh-Morpork Guard's Star Wars: Rebels with Style
    Eric Hassel (Quarterback) in Jemal's Mutant High
    Sariel in Rumspringa's Keep on the Shadowfell
    Khalia ir'Indari in DEFCON1's Eye of the Lich Queen
    Serrana Vao in Karl Green's Knights of the Old Republic (with 213 things Serrana can't do in the Jedi Order)
    Italimelk in Living ENWorld
    Daellin ir'Ayellan in stonegod's Expedition to Castle Ravenloft
    drothgery's Victorian Eberron game
    Star Wars/KotOR Era - The Second K'ril Incursion

  • #79
    Quote Originally Posted by Neonchameleon View Post
    Case in point Current AD&D players are happy with AD&D. Current Pathfinder players are happy with Pathfinder (and supplements are still coming out). Current 4e players are not happy with the plan for 5e.

    Now let's be very clear about something here, I'm not saying I don't like D&Dn; on the contrary I've playtested it, turned it over and inside out (as it currently stands). I would play it instead of AD&D if it was the only D&D being offered or if it and 4e were being offered. I know, at least, that the designer's hearts are in the right place on this one. Were I to run
    it regularly I'd tweak it out to be as close to AD&D as I could get it, in quite a few ways (oh "rests", how I loathe thee).

    BIG COLLABORATIVE DUNGEON PROJECT! SIGN UP AND ADD A ROOM!

    http://www.thedelversdungeon.com/images/tdd1.gif

    Parenthetically, photostat copies of the manuscript rules were made, and when the commercial game was published, fans not willing or financially unable to expend the princely sum of $10 for the product did likewise, copying the material on school (mainly college/university) machines. We were well aware of this, and many gamers who had spent their hard-earned money to buy the game were more irate than we were. In all, though, the 'pirate' material was more helpful that not. Many new fans were made by DMs who were using such copies to run their games. - Gary Gygax

  • #80
    Quote Originally Posted by HoolMarshes Dweller View Post
    Why is asking for reprints of (essentially) 1e/2e a bad idea? That's all I have played all these years. I playtested 5e and liked the direction it was heading. Much like you I find 3.x / 4 not to my tastes for the same reasons you implied.
    I don't think it's a bad idea for players, but I do think it's a bad idea for WotC from a business perspective. If they offer reprints of any other edition going into the future, then these editions compete with their 5E release. Right now, with 5E so far out from release, they'll release reprints - probably just to generate revenue to carry them over until 5E finally does release. But at the end of the day, Mearls & company will be judged by Hasbro on how many units 5E sells, not by how much profit WotC generates. I say this as a member of a company that just got sold by our parent company, even though we were one of their most profitable divisions. Companies - especially larger companies - don't work off a pure profit motive as most people assume. Even if it means lower profits, WotC won't want prior editions stealing sales from 5E.

  • + Log in or register to post
    Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast

    Similar Threads

    1. The Door, Player Expectations, and why 5e can't unify the fanbase.
      By WarlockLord in forum D&D and Pathfinder
      Replies: 575
      Last Post: Monday, 30th July, 2012, 09:26 AM
    2. DDI/CB: An actually modest proposal
      By TerraDave in forum D&D and Pathfinder
      Replies: 6
      Last Post: Friday, 5th November, 2010, 05:10 PM
    3. A modest proposal
      By Dannyalcatraz in forum D&D and Pathfinder
      Replies: 15
      Last Post: Thursday, 27th October, 2005, 06:08 AM
    4. A Modest (Convention) Proposal
      By mythusmage in forum RPGs & Tabletop Gaming Discussion
      Replies: 10
      Last Post: Wednesday, 16th July, 2003, 08:36 AM
    5. A Modest Proposal... (Regarding TWF)
      By Archimago in forum D&D and Pathfinder
      Replies: 18
      Last Post: Thursday, 28th March, 2002, 07:49 AM

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •