What *is* D&D

[steeldragons]

I think it remarkable that the following are so distinctly lacking in so many of these lists:
-Levels
-XP

 

[WheresMyD20]

It's a Saturday morning cartoon that ran during the 80s. There was also a game or something...

 

[Bedrockgames]

Honestly, I think one of the biggest differences "back in the day" was that the designers really had very little contact with how the groups were actually playing the game. It took WOTC and their market research to actually be able to put something of a face on how "a lot of groups" played.

I don't really think this is the case. Reading dragon, various GM supplements, etc over the years it seems they have always had a pretty good handle on the different approaches to play. There have always been trends thats influence the overall feel of a givem edition, but listing off types of players, campaign styles and talk of group dynamics is really nothing new.

 

[Hussar]

I don't really think this is the case. Reading dragon, various GM supplements, etc over the years it seems they have always had a pretty good handle on the different approaches to play. There have always been trends thats influence the overall feel of a givem edition, but listing off types of players, campaign styles and talk of group dynamics is really nothing new.

Well, I'd point to the fact that TSR never did any market research as a case in point.

The contact that they did have was either through conventions goers or people who wrote in to the magazines.

You only have to look at the approach to supplements in 2e. "Throw everything at the wall and see what sticks", is not a particularly good business strategy.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Well, I'd point to the fact that TSR never did any market research as a case in point.

The contact that they did have was either through conventions goers or people who wrote in to the magazines.

You only have to look at the approach to supplements in 2e. "Throw everything at the wall and see what sticks", is not a particularly good business strategy.

WOTC did market research and ended up with 4E

 

[FireLance]

WOTC did market research and ended up with 4E

Well, to use an analogy that I'm sure many gamers will appreciate: Perception checks may not always tell you everything, but that doesn't mean that you should stop making Perception checks.

Or alternatively: you may not find every trap, but that doesn't mean you should stop looking.

 

[Hussar]

WOTC did market research and ended up with 4E

Umm, it also ended up with 3e as well.

And, I'd point out that 4e didn't do badly. Best selling rpg ever, at least for core books, is hardly a failure. 5 year run, perfectly acceptable. Solid annual income from the DDI. Two very healthy organized play groups that are being very well received all over the world. Plus the RPGA, but, since WOTC has put some distance between them and the RPGA, they cannot take credit for that.

The only thing 4e failed to do was achieve the goals that WOTC themselves set.

That does not make it a failure.

 

[Shemeska]

And, I'd point out that 4e didn't do badly. Best selling rpg ever, at least for core books, is hardly a failure. 5 year run, perfectly acceptable. Solid annual income from the DDI.

Citations needed. The first print run was larger yes, but beyond that we don't know any numbers IIRC. We don't know DDI income, but I suspect it has yet to bring in more income than it spent on its original plan.

 

[Lwaxy]

Yeah, I don't buy into the "best selling" part either. Most shops here never even carried 4e stuff.

 

[Akaiku]

Yeah, I don't buy into the "best selling" part either. Most shops here never even carried 4e stuff.

Weird. Every shop here carried it, including every bookstore. It even included the shops with people who worked there actively trying to push an agenda on people trying to buy a book, which isn't as rare as it ought to be.