What would WotC need to do to win back the disenchanted?

[DaveMage]

However, I am sure that one of the reasons it was designed in the manner they did, was to specifically target a younger crowd...as has already been discussed and argued ad nauseum. The fact that a significant group of long term gamers prefer the system is less about a purposeful marketing focus as it's simply about the fact that they like D&D, in any iteration.

I think that another of the reasons it was so different from prior editions is to assure the OGL was not used by some 3rd party to create a clone of the game.

(As Ryan Dancey once indicated - paraphrasing - that in order for D&D to ever be closed again it would have to be radically different from D&D as we'd known it. Voila - 4E!)

 

[DaveMage]

Do we have data to support that?

Pathfinder, the RPG.

 

[ST]

Pathfinder, the RPG.

Seems pretty insulting to Paizo to me to insinuate that people only buy their product because it's not 4e.

I mean, Paizo's been known for years for doing good, solid Adventure Paths, and I often hear their module/adventure support mentioned as a reason people are fans of their products.

By the way, that's also as logically incomplete an argument as saying "All people who hate Pepsi, drink Coke" or "All people who drink Coke, hate Pepsi" (note also those two aren't logically inverse, as well as the fact that other beverages exist).

No offense, but you're inventing a causative connection out of thin air, those things typically need an associated argument.

To be fair, it does seem true that some of the most vocal detractors of 4e have adopted Pathfinder, and attempted to make this connection. But that only says something about that small, vocal group, not Paizo's customer base as a whole.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

A significant portion of long-term customers are not being enticed to stay. If they were, we wouldn't have this thread.

Significant? What 10%? 40%? And I wouldn't base it off of percentages seen here on ENWorld. Members of ENWorld are a niche of a niche.

I'm pretty sure that 4E wasn't designed to be different from 3E so as to purposely entice you to stay.

Me personally? No. Just like it wasn't purposely designed to "fire" any customers.

However, I am sure that one of the reasons it was designed in the manner they did, was to specifically target a younger crowd...as has already been discussed and argued ad nauseum. The fact that a significant group of long term gamers prefer the system is less about a purposeful marketing focus as it's simply about the fact that they like D&D, in any iteration. In other words, you weren't specifically invited to the party, but they're glad you came.

A sample of one doesn't prove a trend or purpose.

So, if this was more than simply making a subjective statement about yourself, what specifically were you trying to say or prove with your statement?

All I can speak for is myself. But I think you are making a false assumption. You are minimizing my enjoyment of the design of 4E and making it seem the only reason I followed to 4E is because I like D&D. That's kind of insulting if I understand you correctly. I feel that the system was designed keeping bith new players in mind and those (like me) who had become disenchanted with 3E's design goals and structure.

 

[renau1g]

Pathfinder, the RPG.

I bought Pathfinder the RPG... wait, but I also play 4e and enjoy it... ahhh.... wait no one person can't possibly play and enjoy both, they're mutually exclusive....ahhh ....

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HY-03vYYAjA]YouTube - Scanners (1981) Head Explosion Shot[/ame]



Oh, yeah I am sure Lisa Stevens and company would be pretty insulted to hear that also. I'm sure most people who went to PF weren't because it was 4e, but rather because it's a well-designed system from a respected publisher

 

[DaveMage]

I mean, Paizo's been known for years for doing good, solid Adventure Paths, and I often hear their module/adventure support mentioned as a reason people are fans of their products.

Pathfinder, THE RPG.

By the way, that's also as logically incomplete an argument as saying "All people who hate Pepsi, drink Coke" or "All people who drink Coke, hate Pepsi" (note also those two aren't logically inverse, as well as the fact that other beverages exist).

The question was whether those disenchanted with 4E was significant. My point was that it was significant enough for a game company to thrive on those looking for a continuation (more or less) of 3.5.

 

[renau1g]

Again, I'm not disenchanted with 4e, yet I also buy Pathfinder THE RPG!!!! material as well. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

 

[BryonD]

Seems pretty insulting to Paizo to me to insinuate that people only buy their product because it's not 4e.

I think that is a pretty serious distortion of what he said.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I would not call drop someone down on a cliff, or into the Black Tentacles "unconscious bullying". But whatever. Point was that 3.5 /PF CAN support these mechanics, even if I recognize the shield thing comes earlier in 4th. But we are going in circles here, maybe.

I don't get it.. please explain (here and below, I ABSOLUTELY don't intend to be harsh - I respect your point of view and enjoy the conversatio, I fear I could make a mistake on the tone since English is not my native language and the topic is.. hot )

Again, pleas explain what a Shield Slam has less than a tide of iron, barring the level you get it (this, I admit could matter.. but nothing else).

When you use Shield Bash, you are literally hitting someone with your shield and the mechanics leave no other interpretation. Tide of Iron isn't (normally) about that. It's about the footwork you use to step into the enemy's ground and drive them back. (It requires a shield because if you try coming forward like that without a shield to protect yourself you're simply going to walk onto the enemy's blade).

I am a but of a literalist so I must be forgiven for that. I have seen kinesthesis, or that the 4e game is kinesthetic several times in this thread. What are we refering to here?

Is it that forces are illustrated in the powers? Because the forces are wonky. Let me tell you, several decades of SCA broadsword fighting and I have never seen anyone knocked back 5 feet from a blow, unless someone was charging. Now I don't care if 4e powers do that, it is fine it is a fantasy game. BUT I do not want to hear how the 4e powers are more REALISTIC because they knock someone back.

The forces aren't realistic. Of course they aren't. This is a game of Dungeons and Dragons. By 5th level you've left mundane realism far behind. They, on the other hand, fit being larger than life. If I'm creating a damn big explosion, I want to see people thrown back by it. And there's a lot of satisfaction in throwing monsters into their own pit traps. If I wanted a realistic fantasy game I'd break out GURPS (or possibly WHFRP 2e if I wanted the tropes).

 

[BryonD]

Again, I'm not disenchanted with 4e, yet I also buy Pathfinder THE RPG!!!! material as well. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

Would you say that this group you are in is "significant"?