D&D 4E David Noonan on 4E "Cloudwatching" (Added Dave's newest comment from his blog)

[DaveMage]

I'm going to be really interested to see some polls come next year as to what percentage of DMs are actually planning to port thier campaigns. My guess right now is that it is about 50%.

Actually, I don't think very many will port their games. I think most who are switching will simply start a new campaign as WotC suggests.

As for the % of 3.5 players & DMs who will leave behind 3.5 and switch to 4.0 whole cloth, I'm guessing 75%. However, I certainly reserve the right to change this prediction once more about the game is known. When the 3e previews started I was very skeptical, but as more and more was revealed, I loved what I saw. I remember what clinched it for me - the preview writeup of Bahamut and Tiamat that (IIRC) appeared in Dragon Magazine. Hit point totals were so low in 2E, that when these 1,000-hp monsters appeared and they showed all the cool changes, I knew they had created a game I wanted to play. In this case, though, as more and more gets revealed for 4e, the more I want to stay with 3.5. However, to be fair, we really haven't seen anything of substance yet (IMO).

I'm more curious as to what Paizo and Necromancer are going to do - and then what effects that decision will have on their bottom line. Both have been silent (although Necromancer has implied in the past that they will support the current version of D&D whatever that is.)

 

[Celebrim]

Uh, my 2E PHB has paladins...

Shows how much attention I paid to it. Anyone have a clue what I'm remembering? I seem to remember some major NPC's had to be overhauled as fighters because thier class went away?

And again, you're mistaking your own experiences for those of the majority. I personally know nobody who ignored most of the changes "and continued to play 1E."

And you don't know anyone who 'voted for Nixon' either. Seriously, I never claimed to know whether I was in a majority (I seldom am, so by that rule I'm likely not), but I do claim that I'm representative of a large number of players because there are quite a few DMs on Enworld that reported the same experience, and my group wasn't the only group in the area that was referencing the 1st edition books as its primary rules documents into the mid-90's at least.

In fact, my understanding is that--until TSR shot itself in the foot (and the head)--2E was a more successful system, in terms of overall sales, than 1E had been.

I have no clue, nor do I know how the sales broke down or what percentage of books were being sold to players that weren't playing 2E (I bought several). I do know that from my perspective, 2E itself was the beginning of it shooting itself in the foot because it wasn't a DM/player driven change in the game. To cite something everyone will remember, demons and devils didn't leave the game because the players demanded it, they left the game because of an internal corporate decision. (Ironically, I may be one of the few DMs that didn't miss them.)

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

Shows how much attention I paid to it. Anyone have a clue what I'm remembering? I seem to remember some major NPC's had to be overhauled as fighters because thier class went away?

Are you thinking of cavaliers?

 

[Mouseferatu]

Shows how much attention I paid to it. Anyone have a clue what I'm remembering? I seem to remember some major NPC's had to be overhauled as fighters because thier class went away?

You could be thinking cavaliers, as someone else suggested. Or perhaps you're thinking of the change paladins went through with the original UA, becoming cavalier subs rather than fighter subs?

And you don't know anyone who 'voted for Nixon' either. Seriously, I never claimed to know whether I was in a majority (I seldom am, so by that rule I'm likely not), but I do claim that I'm representative of a large number of players because there are quite a few DMs on Enworld that reported the same experience, and my group wasn't the only group in the area that was referencing the 1st edition books as its primary rules documents into the mid-90's at least.

That's fine. But then you should be careful with phrases like "none outside the company." And phrases like "large numbers" are misleading as well. Okay, so you know a lot of gamers who stuck (more or less) with 1E. But how does that break down compared to the number who switched? Or who came into 2E without having played 1E?

To cite something everyone will remember, demons and devils didn't leave the game because the players demanded it, they left the game because of an internal corporate decision. (Ironically, I may be one of the few DMs that didn't miss them.)

Absolutely. I'm not saying there were no internal corporate decisions behind any of 2E. But I'd argue whether there were any more behind 2E than you'd find in any other edition.

 

[sjmiller]

As for the % of 3.5 players & DMs who will leave behind 3.5 and switch to 4.0 whole cloth, I'm guessing 75%.

Woo-hoo! I love being in a minority! I am in an even smaller group who did not switch from 3.0 to 3.5, and don't plan to switch to 4.0 either. Unless my players start buying the books for me, I have no plans to repurchase (AGAIN!) the core books. I got 1st ed AD&D, I even bought the core books for 2nd Ed. I got the core books for 3e (and a lot more) but decided there just wasn't enough in 3.5 to make it worthwhile. Same applies to 4.0 so far. Not impressed in the least.

 

[The_Gneech]

I'm more curious as to what Paizo and Necromancer are going to do - and then what effects that decision will have on their bottom line. Both have been silent (although Necromancer has implied in the past that they will support the current version of D&D whatever that is.)

Actually, Paizo at least hasn't been silent. Their stance is, "We don't know yet 'cause we haven't seen the OGL. We know we won't change before the end of the second Pathfinder AP. After that, is currently undecided."

Which seems to me a fair stance, by any standard.

-The Gneech

 

[DaveMage]

Actually, Paizo at least hasn't been silent. Their stance is, "We don't know yet 'cause we haven't seen the OGL. We know we won't change before the end of the second Pathfinder AP. After that, is currently undecided."

Which seems to me a fair stance, by any standard.

-The Gneech

Yes - I was incorrectly substituting the word "silent" for "undecided". You said it better.

 

[DaveMage]

Just a brief update - Clark Peterson has now indicated that Necromancer Games will be moving on to 4e.

 

[Thurbane]

Just a brief update - Clark Peterson has now indicated that Necromancer Games will be moving on to 4e.

 

[Thurbane]

As for the % of 3.5 players & DMs who will leave behind 3.5 and switch to 4.0 whole cloth, I'm guessing 75%.

Over in this poll I created, the percentages (at Enworld) so far are: