D&D 5E Why I Think D&DN is In Trouble

[Bluenose]

Or, alternatively, maybe their vision was "let's see what mechanics people like the best." Like I said, it wasn't a beta play-test, it was a design play-test. In fact, they made quite clear with the first play-test that it was still in the design phase. You propose they only let you see the rules after they've decided, for themselves, what mechanics ought to be used. They took that approach with 4E and decided to take a different road this time.

The problem is that they didn't ask what happened in people's games. They could have, it would have been trivial to include a few check boxes in modules for the GM to tick for which characters made saving throws at Point X(Y,Z), what they did in Room F (negotiate, sneak, trick, fight), etc and then get GMs to report that along with giving the subjective feedback. If you don't know what the "typical" result is, how do you judge whether people who like/dislike the game do so because they had typical or atypical results? It may be that you'll get results from that which tell you what preconeived notions people have about what should happen, and you can then if you want design to that, but it's probably not a good idea to design based on highly vocal people who saw an unusual series of results.

Alternatively, you can decide that the "feel" of D&D is solely in the fluff used rather than on what happens in the game, and design based on that. You can do all the work that will determine what happens when that's finished, tweaking maths is easy, and if people then turn round and complain you can point out that they liked the fluff and were told that the maths still needed tweaking, and it's hardly WotC's fault that those tweaks made a big difference to what happened - they were after all told by the playtesters that the "feel" was right.

 

[The Human Target]

Not to say you don't maybe have some valid concerns, even with a bit of panicy hyperbole.

But...

When was the last time WotC (or whoever owned D&D) did anything that you really liked/didn't have a bad feeling about?

 

[Halivar]

The problem is that they didn't ask what happened in people's games.

No, but people were talking about it. A lot. There was a lot of data available, and I saw the questionnaires as more of an attempt to get discussion started, hence the vagueness. I mean, for WotC not to pick up on it, they'd have to be avoiding not just EnWorld, but their own forums, and we know that they read both.

 

[dmccoy1693]

I really don't think there will be much of an edition war this time. There will certainly be some 4E fans that are disappointed, but I don't think there will be the vitriol that surrounded the last edition change. Fans of 0e-3.x have already moved on (or simply continued to play their edition of choice), so what D&D does might be of passing interest, but I doubt the passion will be there to defend one's edition of choice as there has been in the past.

I agree. IMO, all the 4E hate really came from a perception by the 3.x crowd (oh which I was apart of) feeling like we were told that our game was crap. There were very few WotC people that were able to talk about 4E being awesome without overtly saying that 3E was terrible. My personal favorite was when a Wizards staffer, on Wizards.com said something very close to (if not a direct quote), "In third edition, all a Heal check told you was what you stepped in."

No one (atleast from Wizards) saying that this time around. So I really don't think that there will be such passionate edition wars this time around. Heck, I'm hopeful that any edition wars will be more like edition skirmishes instead.

 

[billd91]

I really don't think there will be much of an edition war this time. There will certainly be some 4E fans that are disappointed, but I don't think there will be the vitriol that surrounded the last edition change. Fans of 0e-3.x have already moved on (or simply continued to play their edition of choice), so what D&D does might be of passing interest, but I doubt the passion will be there to defend one's edition of choice as there has been in the past.

Maybe, but I'm not convinced. We've already seen plenty edition war-esque shots at Next from 4e fans just like we saw 3e fans firing at 4e and 1e/2e fans lobbing away at 3e. The main question that I have is how big and widespread the sniping will be.

I suppose a side question would be how the anti-4e/pro-4e coalitions will remix for Next. Will the pro-4e coalition be the same as the anti-Next coalition or will the pro/anti-Next groupings have some unexpected intersections with pro/anti-3e and 4e groups. Should be interesting for the armchair sociologists.

 

[Halivar]

I suppose a side question would be how the anti-4e/pro-4e coalitions will remix for Next. Will the pro-4e coalition be the same as the anti-Next coalition or will the pro/anti-Next groupings have some unexpected intersections with pro/anti-3e and 4e groups. Should be interesting for the armchair sociologists.

Some people are saying it's too much like 4E, some people are saying it's too much like 3E. I don't think there will be an anti-Next coalition because the people that don't like it have grown in completely disparate directions of gaming preference.

 

[Brian Gibbons]

I think an edition war would be a step up from what we have now, since that at least would show some passion.

I started with 2e and eagerly went with every edition change since; I playtested D&DN since the very first "family & friends" version. After all that, "apathy" is probably a pretty good description of my thoughts on D&DN.

I don't hate the version; there's actually a few things in there that I thought were quite nicely done, and that I'll probably steal when running something else. I wouldn't even have any problem playing a D&DN game if someone in my group really wanted to, but at the end of the day, there's just nothing there to get me excited, nothing that makes me want to play this instead of something else, and certainly nothing that makes me want to spend my money on the line.

D&D will never die. The name recognition alone will keep it alive, and there's always going to be new or returning players walking into game stores and conventions looking to play "D&D" regardless of what actual mechanics are behind that brand.

But, yeah, the signs aren't there that this is going to be the resounding success that WOTC was gambling on. Especially as they've essentially sacrificed better than a year's worth of product sales, I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out that WOTC could have made more money with a 4.5e than they will with D&DN.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Or, alternatively, maybe their vision was "let's see what mechanics people like the best." Like I said, it wasn't a beta play-test, it was a design play-test. In fact, they made quite clear with the first play-test that it was still in the design phase. You propose they only let you see the rules after they've decided, for themselves, what mechanics ought to be used. They took that approach with 4E and decided to take a different road this time.

I can hardly imagine six saving throws are popular... or a bunch of other ideas still in the game.

Even if you design by committee, you start with a small committee and sensible design ideas, then expand from there.

WotC may have been shafted by losing one of their top designers early on. That may have forced them to start anew. But I don't recall if Monte Cook left before or after the open playtest started.

 

[Pour]

... I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out that WOTC could have made more money with a 4.5e than they will with D&DN.

Man, I would have bought that up. Incorporating everything they learned along the way, math fixes and errata, but also the lessons of late-edition adventure and monster design from the get go, catered to all adventuring tiers, and eliminated the redundancy... It would have been awesome.

And had they only eased the severity of the GSL and hooked even one semi-important third party publisher, that could have revamped the whole thing and bought some necessary good will. I mean if Paizo could use their association to launch Pathfinder, imagine the opportunity for a talented smaller publisher to affiliate with a successful relaunch. With the right incentives, someone could have taken the risk.

Oh man, then we might actually still have Dungeon and Dragon then, too. And with a larger pool of talent. Builder was already up and running (yeah, I prefer the downloadable one, too, but hey). And there was an established Encounters, Lair Assault, Living Forgotten Realms, and Ashes of Athas community play. And they had 4thcore for awhile, too.

Huh, it would have been closer to the 4e launch the edition deserved, one based on its actual merits. Could have altered some of the layout/graphic design choices to really stand out.

But at least we have D&D Kre-O...

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

I can hardly imagine six saving throws are popular.

Depends on how you look at it. I see it not as "Six Saving Throws," but instead as "Saving Throws Replaced by Ability Checks." So, by my count, they slimmed down the number of checks by folding saves into six checks that already existed.