Confirm or Deny: D&D4e would be going strong had it not been titled D&D

[innerdude]

Actually, it's both poll responses taken together.

The key phrase in poll answer # 1 is expectations.

If you were expecting 4e to be a fairly "traditional" take on D&D and its historical roots, then there was likely nothing that was ever going to get you to really give it a fair shake. If you had no existing expectations, or were willing to to take 4e "as is" and play to its strengths, then it would be successful at what it did.

But that said, even if you fell into the 2nd camp (no preconceptions / expectations, a willingness to take 4e on its own merits), I've said it before and I'll say it again, the INITIAL RELEASE of the "Core 3" books + Keep on the Shadowfell did absolutely nothing to dispel the early rumblings from detractors that something just "wasn't quite right" with the play experience the majority of groups seemed to be having.

Throw in a talented GM like @pemerton, @Manbearcat, etc. and suddenly 4e can be drifted into something unique. But the core release materials did nothing to point players toward that outcome.

So ultimately it was both---unmet expectations, plus an inability of the core materials to point groups to the real "core" playstyle that 4e worked best for----drifted light Narrativism within high-concept scene framing married to tactical gamism.

And if you didn't like that playstyle to begin with, 4e wasn't particularly built to support much else.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I think if they tried that, and stayed in the fantasy genre, they would have invited the comparison with D&D - especially if they stopped publishing 3e upon release of the game - and that would have led to many of the same conflicts and limitations. Folks would have asked, "Why are they pushing this new fantasy game? Why don't they just do another D&D?"

Now, I think that 4e might have made a decent engine for, say, a Space Opera game. And then the picture might be different. But again, if they stopped publishing 3e to support the Space Opera line, that would have been problematic.

After looking beyond my "this ain't D&D to me" position on 4Ed- which I still hold, honestly- I found it to be a really good system. And the more I looked at it and imagined it without the shoehorned legacy tropes, the more I felt that, not only could it be a good FRPG, it could have been an excellent toolbox system a la Savage Worlds, GURPS or HERO.*

And yes, I meant that it would have been a profitable product, if not necessarily as profitable as it was. But even with the branding, it didn't really manage to kill off its predecessor. It wasn't Zeus overthrowing Cronos, it was Yrkoon briefly supplanting but ultimately falling to Elric.





* and honestly, WotC could still repurpose it that way.

 

[Aribar]

Regardless, as a large fan of 4E, I've got to say its "demise" (such a weird word for this...) wasn't caused by its attachment to D&D. In my opinion the D&D name does much more to bring people into the hobby than force people away because "it's not D&D". I think it was due to mismanagement. Lack of PDFs and going further with the digital tools, the Essentials series, weird balancing errata, Mearl's misunderstanding of how the game worked, and simply lack of support in later years made it lose popularity.

 

[DM Howard]

Regardless, as a large fan of 4E, I've got to say its "demise" (such a weird word for this...) wasn't caused by its attachment to D&D. In my opinion the D&D name does much more to bring people into the hobby than force people away because "it's not D&D". I think it was due to mismanagement. Lack of PDFs and going further with the digital tools, the Essentials series, weird balancing errata, Mearl's misunderstanding of how the game worked, and simply lack of support in later years made it lose popularity.

Whilst a fan of 4E as well, I think the battle was lost within the first year. Due to the things you mentioned or their precursors. I think the D&D brand brought too much "emotional baggage" to the table, and even though the game was pretty darn good, people couldn't look past it's exterior. Kind of like how people can't look past the silly past of Hackmaster to give the current edition a go. Just my two cents.

 

[Dustin DePenning]

Some great posts – all summing up much of its demise.

I ran one shot adventure of 4th edition to see what my friends though. Immediately they all griped about how different and unlike D&D 3.5 it was. They all wanted a 3.9 (which is Pathfinder.) They had bought in so deeply into the mechanical rat maze of 3.5 that they weren't ready to leave. They had mastered its bizarre, unbalanced rules and situational mechanics. They had conquered that game, learned which rules to ignore, and which rules to make up to "fix" it. 3.9 would have breathed some much needed life into the game without undoing all their hard work mastering it.

4E shattered all those expectations. My friends weren't ready. Couple that with how 4E was marketed so oddly toward cross-over video gamers, they felt the game wasn't meant for them. So they all went to Pathfinder.

I remember being angry at them for not giving it a chance, and going to play a "new" system that was not a significant improvement over the old one. But it's what they wanted, and I can't fault them for it.

 

[Stacie GmrGrl]

If the name was changed from D&D4e to Final Fantasy Tactics RPG I think the game would have been more successful. Sure the fluff would all be FF and not D&D and it would have been a better game.

To me, what did 4e in was their change to the Essentials line. To this day that decision to change the format of how 4e was presented and changed was so bonkers bad it was the catalyst that divided the 4e player base.

As for game play, 4e has the best combat system of all D&D games... Of course a subjective opinion and only my own but to me its the most fun.

 

[Zak S]

If 4e had been released as the (formerly known as) Oriental Adventures game side-by-side with 3.5 I think it would have been very well-received.

 

[Bedrockgames]

If 4e had been released as the (formerly known as) Oriental Adventures game side-by-side with 3.5 I think it would have been very well-received.

This I agree with. For a typical D&D campaign, I found myself fighting with the 4E system. For something like a wuxia campaign I think it would have been a perfect fit.

 

[billd91]

This I agree with. For a typical D&D campaign, I found myself fighting with the 4E system. For something like a wuxia campaign I think it would have been a perfect fit.

It may have had something to do with going to the drive-in to see Kung Fu Panda the same week my 4e PH arrived, but I felt much the same way.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

I think it would have done better, but ultimately still failed. Branding it D&D surely expedited it's demise.