When did I stop being WotC's target audience?

[Aeolius]

No one still drives a Model T.

Better not tell THESE FOLKS

 

[Psion]

In my book, that spells "no good for roleplaying."

I have that book.

 

[billd91]

I rather doubt they're road-worthy. I'll rephrase.

No ones still uses a Model T for its intended purpose: transportation.

Plenty of people still use OD&D for its intended purpose.

You're seriously implying that means something? We'll see how many people are playing OD&D 50 years from now, then we'll have comparable frames of reference.

 

[Ycore Rixle]

There's an awful lot of misinformation involved in this post.

1) 4E is a runaway success, sales-wise. The transition was quite smooth enough, and there was no misjudgment of the market. There may have been a misjudgment of a small portion of the market, but if so, it wasn't enough to substantially harm the launch of the game.

2) Rob Heinsoo is stepping down to take a more active role in actually writing, and James Wyatt--who is taking his place--had a more direct hand in the creation of 4E than Rob did. Notice the names on the covers of the books.

This whole "I don't like 4E, so it's obviously a failure" shtick is getting old. Yes, a large number of the old fan base doesn't like it. That's been the case with every edition to date, and will always be the case with new editions.

Is 4E the perfect game ever? No. Could some of the marketing have been handled better? Yes. Was 4E somehow a mistake or a disaster just because there's been a lot of shouting about it on the internet? Not even remotely.

Actually, for the record, I like 4e and DM a 4e game regularly.

Ari, I'm not sure where the misinformation is. Maybe you meant disinformation? But I didn't intend to mislead, either. It's true that a couple of months after release, the lead of the mechanical design team stepped down. By the way, I thought Mike Mearls, not James Wyatt, took Rob's place. Last I was working with those guys, James was very much on the story side of things, so a jump to mechanical design would be a big one. But that was a while ago, so who knows.

Anyway, I'm not putting out any dis- or mis- information. Just saying what happened.

My conclusion that WOTC is not fully satisfied with the launch of 4e is, I think, clearly my own conclusion. I'm not reporting on some insider knowledge or scooping a news bit. I'm just saying, DDI was a disaster, people like Jeff feel alienated and aren't buying stuff, major publishers like Clark Peterson are calling 4E a miniatures game and saying it doesn't have the soul of D&D, and the GSL is nonexistent. I think that given those things, it's safe to say that WOTC is not fully satisfied with 4E's launch. They sure shouldn't be.

I understand that some are tired of the ""I don't like 4E, so it's obviously a failure" shtick. But that is not the case here. I like 4E, I play 4E, I DM 4E. Could it be better? Yes. But it's fun. It's launch has been a commercial success. Does that mean that WOTC read the market correctly? Nope, not at all. They botched it in significant ways. Enough to ruin the game? Nope. Enough to ruin it for some people? Yep.

 

[Aeolius]

We'll see how many people are playing OD&D 50 years from now, then we'll have comparable frames of reference.

And they have to use their original dice, or it's cheating. No mixing new dice in with the old dice.

 

[Greg K]

You couldn't make the character you wanted, unless you could justify any non adventuring details mechanically. A fighter/blacksmith? How you going to pull that off without making a subpar fighter?

Fighter with Craft (blacksmithing).

You had to do it by not actually taking fighter levels, you had to dip in something else for skill points,never mind your concept is not rogueish at all.

Or just use the Customizing a character section from the PHB (3.0/p.94 and 3.5/p.110). There is an example of trading in a few things for extra skill points per level and a couple of class skills.

 

[billd91]

And they have to use their original dice, or it's cheating. No mixing new dice in with the old dice.

Well, I won't necessarily hold them to that strictly. I imagine some people have had to custom make parts to keep the Model Ts running in the 100 years since they were introduced and 80 since they were discontinued. I would consider resorting to a chit cup to be an acceptible substitution.

 

[Mallus]

I'm an old HERO player, so I'm used to divorcing the mechanics from the special effects -- but there's only so much reskinning you can do before you've left the realm of handwaving and entered the realm of metaphoric schizophrenia.

OK... I guess I just approach it from a different angle.

I play in a group that's really good at creating... diverse personalities for their characters (oh, they're really good at... diverse mechanics too, but that's another story). I'm confident that you could give each of us the exact same PC --let's go "all in" and make it the exact same 1e fighter-- and by the end of a single session we'd all have completely unique characters, in terms of the their personalities, and, well, their role-playing.

 

[Fifth Element]

You're seriously implying that means something? We'll see how many people are playing OD&D 50 years from now, then we'll have comparable frames of reference.

I wasn't the one who brought up the comparison in the first place.

But for the record, no I don't think it's a good comparison, I was jut trying to work with the comparison given to me. The comparison is invalid because cars are something that physically wear out over time, unless you put a good deal of work into them. They require maintenance over time. OD&D is just as playable now as it was 30 years ago.

 

[Fifth Element]

Better not tell THESE FOLKS

Are you saying the only people who use OD&D are collectors? They don't actually use it, but like to display it with other collectors?

Really, the whole comparison is ridiculous and I'm sorry I tried to refute it.