Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 5987998" data-attributes="member: 2067"><p>I don't really regard these as two completely separate editions. They seem to share a lot more in common than 4e and 5e do. If you want to dig deep into .5's, then surely you must consider 4-Essentials to be 4.5, and thus we're back to 4.5e being the shortest of the editions (1 year?) and 4e to be close on its tails (2 years?). Whens speaking of market share, it wasn't 3e that saw them loose the spot as the world's <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=1" target="_blank">#1</a> tabletop game. </p><p></p><p>But whatever. My point was ultimately that sales data can't be used as a metric for whether or not an edition was a solid ruleset enjoyed by millions. Game designers are inherently tinkerers, so when sales data comes to them that tells them to get started on the next e or next .5 because they need a new sales spike, they can't help but react to the game that exists and change it into something that reflects their own take on the goals for the redesign. </p><p></p><p>One of the lessons learned with 4e seems to be that if you only include the goals of one insular group of people in Washington State who play the game in a particular way (or think it can be marketed most profitably in a particular way), it's going to loose you a whole lot more than it gains. So one of the reactions to that is to make an expansive game. 5e is, by all the conversation so far, planned to be quite expansive.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That seems very cynical to me. I see no reason not to take what WotC says at face value. They're putting an <em>insane</em> amount of time and money on the line if it's just a marketing stunt, and what's more, the feedback seems to be heard and responded to (see: Combat Superiority). </p><p></p><p>You also seem to be conflating two groups of people. I don't think those who complained about 3e are, in most cases, the same people that complained about the changes that 4e brought.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think selection bias has perhaps clouded your view of all the people who <em>want a Vancian Wizard</em>, and also your view of all the ways WotC has at their disposal to give those who want a variant, a variant. </p><p></p><p>5e is modular, after all, and they've <em>explicitly</em> stated that alternate spell systems is something they want to include.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 5987998, member: 2067"] I don't really regard these as two completely separate editions. They seem to share a lot more in common than 4e and 5e do. If you want to dig deep into .5's, then surely you must consider 4-Essentials to be 4.5, and thus we're back to 4.5e being the shortest of the editions (1 year?) and 4e to be close on its tails (2 years?). Whens speaking of market share, it wasn't 3e that saw them loose the spot as the world's [URL=http://www.enworld.org/forum/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=1]#1[/URL] tabletop game. But whatever. My point was ultimately that sales data can't be used as a metric for whether or not an edition was a solid ruleset enjoyed by millions. Game designers are inherently tinkerers, so when sales data comes to them that tells them to get started on the next e or next .5 because they need a new sales spike, they can't help but react to the game that exists and change it into something that reflects their own take on the goals for the redesign. One of the lessons learned with 4e seems to be that if you only include the goals of one insular group of people in Washington State who play the game in a particular way (or think it can be marketed most profitably in a particular way), it's going to loose you a whole lot more than it gains. So one of the reactions to that is to make an expansive game. 5e is, by all the conversation so far, planned to be quite expansive. That seems very cynical to me. I see no reason not to take what WotC says at face value. They're putting an [I]insane[/I] amount of time and money on the line if it's just a marketing stunt, and what's more, the feedback seems to be heard and responded to (see: Combat Superiority). You also seem to be conflating two groups of people. I don't think those who complained about 3e are, in most cases, the same people that complained about the changes that 4e brought. I think selection bias has perhaps clouded your view of all the people who [I]want a Vancian Wizard[/I], and also your view of all the ways WotC has at their disposal to give those who want a variant, a variant. 5e is modular, after all, and they've [I]explicitly[/I] stated that alternate spell systems is something they want to include. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
Top