Convincing 4th Edition players to consider 5th Edition

I wholeheartedly agree that 4e is for tactical miniature play, and yes, there can be role-playing involved as well. I don't find it to be a role-playing game and that's not to dismiss or be rude to 4e's greatest adherents that's how I and many others see it.

I am excited about 5e simply because it offers a chance to bring the community together like never before.
Given the bolded part, I don't think the last comment above has much of a chance. We apparently have a "community" in which some segments of it insist that other segments are not even part of the community despite all evidence to the contrary.

If you're for bringing the D&D community together, you'll stop saying things like "4E is not an RPG."
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Alarian

First Post
Well. I'm sorry that's your opinion, because your opinion is factually wrong. Please take the edition warring somewhere else. Making thinly veiled insults of other players masked behind "well that's just my opinion" is major uncoolness.

So if I take a rusted out 1968 Volkswagon Bug and make a nice fancy sign that says "2012 Porsche 911" does that make it so? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion on what 3rd, 4th, or any other edition is. Just because you don't agree with their opinions doesn't make theirs and less valid than yours. The fact is a LOT of people have the same opinion on what 4th is as the person you quoted (just as a lot of people feel the same way you do).
 

Obryn

Hero
So if I take a rusted out 1968 Volkswagon Bug and make a nice fancy sign that says "2012 Porsche 911" does that make it so? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion on what 3rd, 4th, or any other edition is. Just because you don't agree with their opinions doesn't make theirs and less valid than yours. The fact is a LOT of people have the same opinion on what 4th is as the person you quoted (just as a lot of people feel the same way you do).
I was hoping we could at least agree that, in the interest of keeping the forum edition-war free that maybe this isn't a productive statement in any way, shape or form.

Surely you can see that "4e is not an RPG" is kind of like a firebomb for edition warring, right?

-O
 

i wasn't looking to start an edition war nor am i looking to sing cumbayah with everyone. I'm open to people having differing opinions on things. It's how we state those things. I have an opinion, I'm not flaming anyone and I stated it. You're welcome to disagree.

5e is so far great, I'm thinking that it will offer plenty to bring in 4e players too. We just have to wait and see. It certainly makes for good discussion.
 

n00bdragon

First Post
So if I take a rusted out 1968 Volkswagon Bug and make a nice fancy sign that says "2012 Porsche 911" does that make it so? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion on what 3rd, 4th, or any other edition is. Just because you don't agree with their opinions doesn't make theirs and less valid than yours. The fact is a LOT of people have the same opinion on what 4th is as the person you quoted (just as a lot of people feel the same way you do).

Yes, actually it does. If James M. Jenness takes a poop in a box of Rice Krispies you may say it looks like ****, smells like ****, and tastes like **** but the fact remains that is a box of genuine Rice Krispies cereal. That's how brands work.
 

i wasn't looking to start an edition war

Then, you know ... Don't go around starting them, maybe, by claiming that 4E isn't a roleplaying game?

Because that attitude still needs to go the way of the dodo. One True Wayism has no freakin' place here.

The fact is a LOT of people have the same opinion on what 4th is as the person you quoted (just as a lot of people feel the same way you do).

Yes, and those people are being insulting jerks when they start posting about it. It is not helpful to the discussion; it does not advance the dialog. It's a smug, self-centered, dismissive argument that needs to stop being made.
 
Last edited:

Obryn

Hero
i wasn't looking to start an edition war nor am i looking to sing cumbayah with everyone. I'm open to people having differing opinions on things. It's how we state those things. I have an opinion, I'm not flaming anyone and I stated it. You're welcome to disagree.

5e is so far great, I'm thinking that it will offer plenty to bring in 4e players too. We just have to wait and see. It certainly makes for good discussion.
OK. What I'm saying is...

IMO, Productive Opinions:
"Vancian Wizards sux"
"Fighters with Dailies sux"
"HPs are/are not physical damage"

These are things about which, at the very least, productive discussion is theoretically possible. (For about 3 pages. ;))

"4e is not an RPG" or "4e is not D&D" is basically just saying "4e players? You're not in the club, and you're wrong about the kind of game you're playing." There's no way to dress it up pretty; it's always an edition war statement. IMO, it's much more productive to try and figure out why you think this, and then state your opinions about the stuff that you don't like. Nobody's asking you to like 4e, but one of the goals of 5e is to give everyone a seat at the table.

YMMV and all that. I'm not in charge here. :)

-O
 

Shadeydm

First Post
I'd be shocked if they did, though. There's just no reason to put work - design work - into piecing together something almost as good as 4e, when you can just keep playing 4e.

WotC is going to have to actively kill 4e to get us doing that. Fortunately for them, they have the tools to do that, the GSL is not like the OGL, WotC can and probably will not only take down on-line tools but C&D anything close to a 4e retro-clone.

I can't imagine there being any reason to leave the tool up and running for more than a year after 5E launches so um yeah part of the reason 4E was so different was to make sure there would be no repeat of Pathfinder when it came time to make a new edition.

I can't agree. The 'core' we were presented with in the playtest was a retro-clone of classic D&D first and foremost, and a terrible foundation to build a modular (let alone balanced) game up from. Sure, there are bits from 3e & 4e - it's still basically d20, there's a spell called Healing Word - but the soul of it is old-school D&D, and old-school D&D was successful because it lacked competition. Modern D&D does not lack for competition.
What did you expect it to look like 4E? Of course it resembles the older editions in some respects its telling those fans they too will be included.

Yep, that's the nature of compromises. A compromise requires a compelling reason, though. For WotC, the compelling reason to compromise among past editions when designing 5e is that they can represent to their dark lords at Hasbro that doing so will let them re-capture the revenue lost to Pathfinder and retro-clones while retaining the revenue of 4e and driving new-customer growth. It's a good story around a conference table, I suppose, or they wouldn't have gotten the green light. It's OK as a marketing story, too, at the vaporware stage, because you can promise everyone what they want. When you start having to deliver on those promises, everyone realizes they're /not/ going to get what they want.

And the customer has little reason to compromise. The big one is, as always, the D&D name. I've left D&D before when it got bad enough, and the whole of the Pathfinder set is demonstrably willing to do so. Retro-clone fans had long since abandoned the D&D product line in favor of the D&D they already had.

I'm afraid 5e may end up selling only to those who are just unwaveringly loyal to the brand, while fans of old editions continue to play their old editions and retro-clones, and fans of 4e continue to play 4e or move on to other more modern games.

Really the dark lords/corporate masters talk that 4E fans ridiculed has come full circle and is now being reiterated by 4E fans? Thats rich...
 

Imaro

Legend
Then, you know ... Don't go around starting them, maybe, by claiming that 4E isn't a roleplaying game?

Because that attitude still needs to go the way of the dodo. One True Wayism has no freakin' place here.

I'd probably say the same thing about the attitude you displayed when responding to my post... so it's not ok to edition war but it is okay to make condescending and/or heated posts towards fellow members of the boards... Kettle...Pot.



Yes, and those people are being insulting jerks when they start posting about it. It is not helpful to the discussion; it does not advance the dialog. It's a smug, self-centered, dismissive argument that needs to stop being made.

Insulting jerks, huh... smug, self centered, dismissive... right.
 

I'd probably say the same thing about the attitude you displayed when responding to my post...

Given the response to my post, and the fact that you were supporting someone who was saying that the "4E is not D&D / is not an RPG / is just a tactical minis game" argument is perfectly fine, I don't think your point was as misunderstood as you think it was.

Or, we all misunderstood it in practically the same way, which points to a problem with the transmitter, not the receivers.

I could have worded my post to you more politely. For that I apologize. However, that does not change my point at all.

Insulting jerks, huh... smug, self centered, dismissive... right

Yes, exactly - saying "You know what, I don't like the way you play D&D; ergo, you aren't really playing D&D" is smug, self-centered, and dismissive.

Again, I restate the point: there are many ways to play D&D; they are, none of them intrinsically better than any other - merely better or worse for you or for me. Claiming that one of them is one, true way to play and that the others are objectively lesser playstyles is insulting and has no place in these discussions.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top