D&D General Extra Credits: The History of D&D Hasbro Refused to Learn

darjr

I crit!
I see what you mean, I think. You are referring to PF outselling 4e in a given time period, but before 4e ceased the release of new products. Is that correct?
Apparently PF outsold 4e before 4e products ceased, in retail via ICV2 numbers. But yea.

And according to Lisa Stevens who ran Paizo at the time.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Dire Bare

Legend
Apparently PF outsold 4e before 4e products ceased, in retail via ICV2 numbers. But yea.

And according to Lisa Stevens who ran Paizo at the time.
Lisa Stevens certainly knew how high Pathfinder sales were at the time.

She had no clue what D&D sales were at the time. She's also a bit biased towards promoting the company she owns.

You don't trust Teos? I don't trust Lisa.

The myth continues . . .
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
Exactly. The game is so tightly wound and expects you to play it as written that even trying to mod the thing unravels the lot. Unified mechanics make some things easier, but they can also make the game harder to mod.
The benefit of discrete subsystems is that you can kitbash one while (usually) not having too much effect on the others. Unified mechanics lose this benefit.
Yep. But it’s not for lack of trying on Gygax’s part. He very clearly and explicitly commended from on high that the RAW of the AD&D book was to be respected and followed.
And then goes on to contradict himself in the various places in the DMG where he exhorts DMs to do whatever's needed to "make the game your own".
Initiative is only “in parts” if you look at it from a modern perspective and inssit on referencing the entire AD&D line for the “complete” rules. It was whole and complete in the PHB. That they layered extra stuff on top of that later doesn’t change that.
Sorry, but 1e initiative as written is a rolling disaster both in theory and in practice no matter how hard you squint at it.
 

Zardnaar

Legend
Lisa Stevens certainly knew how high Pathfinder sales were at the time.

She had no clue what D&D sales were at the time. She's also a bit biased towards promoting the company she owns.

You don't trust Teos? I don't trust Lisa.

The myth continues . . .

There was also ICV2 reports at the time and online play numbers. Jonathan Tweet in an interview also claimed 4E was a disaster. You know tge guy who designed it.

3.5 at the time was more popular than 4E online. Not Pathfinder which was number 1.
 



overgeeked

B/X Known World
The benefit of discrete subsystems is that you can kitbash one while (usually) not having too much effect on the others. Unified mechanics lose this benefit.
Yes, that's what I said.
And then goes on to contradict himself in the various places in the DMG where he exhorts DMs to do whatever's needed to "make the game your own".
Yes, he absolutely does.
Sorry, but 1e initiative as written is a rolling disaster both in theory and in practice no matter how hard you squint at it.
It depends entirely on what parts of the AD&D systems and subsystems you're using and at what point in the line's history you're talking about. All books, all options, at the end of the line's life...yes, it's an absolute nightmare. But the AD&D initiative system as written in the PHB is dead simple: both sides roll 1d6, high roll wins. Hasted goes first; slowed goes last. That's it. That's what we always used. Never tacked on extra nonsense.

AD&D PHB p104: "The initiative check is typically made with 2 six-sided dice, 1d6 for the party, and another of a different size or color for the creatures encountered. This check is made each round of play where first action is a factor. Because a round is a full minute long, dexterity seldom is a factor in the determination of which side acts first. However, if one group is slowed or hasted, or one or more members of the group are, the initiative will always go to the non-slowed or hasted side. In most other cases, the group with the higher die score will always act first. For effects of initiative in fighting, see COMBAT hereafter."
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
One piece in that blog that caught my eye is where the blogger references the roll20 stats for Q4 2021 to point out 4e was being more widely played on the platform than Numenara, 13th Age, and various other systems as a means of pumping 4e's success.

While I'm not sure how well set up roll20 is for handling non-5e games in general (though I do know trying to play modified 1e on it is a struggle), I'd posit it's well suited for 4e's sometimes-complex grid-based game and thus would be attracitve to 4e DMs and players; and that in any case this amounts to comparing the size of one grain of sand vs another when both sit next to a boulder.
 


Zardnaar

Legend
One piece in that blog that caught my eye is where the blogger references the roll20 stats for Q4 2021 to point out 4e was being more widely played on the platform than Numenara, 13th Age, and various other systems as a means of pumping 4e's success.

While I'm not sure how well set up roll20 is for handling non-5e games in general (though I do know trying to play modified 1e on it is a struggle), I'd posit it's well suited for 4e's sometimes-complex grid-based game and thus would be attracitve to 4e DMs and players; and that in any case this amounts to comparing the size of one grain of sand vs another when both sit next to a boulder.

I don't think 13th Age ever was a top 5 rpg, Numenera briefly was.

I'm sure 4E has outsikdcevery other RPG not called D&D though. And it's plausible Pathfinder outsold it at some point in time which was what the claim is about.
 

Remove ads

Top