D&D 4E 4E's New Direction: Giving the game back to the DM.

[ExploderWizard]

WOTC realized an important fact. DM's might only represent one out of every five or six players but if the game isn't fun for them too, then it doesn't happen at all.

 

[TerraDave]

3.x removed DM control. 4e gave it back to some degree, but not so much wrt magic items. That has now been fixed.

Thats a good summary (and no, I still can't give you XP)

There's an obvious reason why WotC would want player's to have more control: there's more of them than there are DMs.

SNIP

This kind of thinking has obviously been a big force in RPG (and some other game) design for 25 years. But, I think WotC found the limits of it.

-Not all buying is equal. Some people like to really buy books, these people also tend to DM, and that DMs buy a surprising amount of "player" oriented material. Other people hardly buy anything, they are always players.

-DMs drive the game. If they are unhappy, there is no game.

The new twist here is the DDI. Basically WotC wants a bunch of DMs to get players to get a bunch of DDI subscriptions. They may also buy some books. But the big purchasers remain DMs. And in fact WotCs new releases--all those box sets--are consistent with this.

 

[TikkchikFenTikktikk]

Basically WotC wants a bunch of DMs to get players to get a bunch of DDI subscriptions. They may also buy some books.

Apocryphal, but I've heard of games in my town where everyone is expected to have a DDI subscription during play and are required to use Character Builder and its character sheets.

Players are actually discouraged from buying books so they don't fall behind with Rules Updates and cause conflict at the table because of it.

I've heard of them, because the DMs left playing Encounters and started DMing their own "friends-only" Wednesday night games and a few of the "friends" defected back to Encounters. I've also read some threads about these type of games right here on Enworld.

But the big purchasers remain DMs. And in fact WotCs new releases--all those box sets--are consistent with this.

I don't know that even DMs are buying books anymore. They have DDI accounts too, and get their fluff from Dragon and Dungeon and illicit PDFs. (Dark Sun Campaign Setting has been available all over the usual locations since at least the release date, OCRed and chaptered.)

I'm the (volunteer) D&D Encounters coordinator at my FLGS. Players and DMs are not shy at all about talking about using PDFs instead of buying books. Inside the FLGS. I'm afraid I'll divert the conversation by bringing this up, but at least locally the use of illicit PDFs is widespread. Coincidentally, 4E book sales here have been pretty mediocre. Maybe the Barnes & Noble is moving some units since they only carry 4E anymore; quite a change from 2-3 years ago when they had a huge variety & selection of systems and associated splatbooks to choose from.

I'd say the boxes are a response to a combination of three things:

• Most of the content of the books is available in digital form for much less than the MSRP for the hardcover.
• Retailers, who are a huge promotional/marketing venue in addition to their role as point of sale, are upset they're losing business because you can get the three $20-$40 books that came out that month, plus every book ever released, for $10 a month. And that $10 doesn't go through them, it goes straight to WotC.
• WotC and Retailers upset they're losing business because you can get everything for free in an extremely nice to look at (DDI Compendium and Character Builder don't have any art and are subjectively ugly) and convenient to use digital format.

The value of the box sets will be the physical bits that are hard to reproduce at home in decent quality: round tokens, big, shiny, poster maps, the box itself, hefty dungeon tiles, "non-collectible" cards on nice, shuffle-able cardstock, etc.

 

[TikkchikFenTikktikk]

WOTC realized an important fact. DM's might only represent one out of every five or six players but if the game isn't fun for them too, then it doesn't happen at all.

How long until published adventures come in a box set, and that box set includes "DM cards", cards not for the DM, but replacing the DM. Sort of a choose your own adventure meets playing cards thing?

WotC's published adventures are so linear and hack-n-slashy anyway, this might be an improvement.

Didn't Tunnels and Trolls have rules for play without referees?

 

[Stalker0]

WOTC realized an important fact. DM's might only represent one out of every five or six players but if the game isn't fun for them too, then it doesn't happen at all.

Or put another way, while it might be hard to recruit new players, its often really hard to recruit new DMs.

Overall I think WOTC has made a solid compromise with this new model. Players get to point at the line in the sand and say "alright, all magic items on this side of line we can buy and sell and make as we want"...while the DM goes "that's fine, but everything else is my turf".

I am hopeful the new system allows for uncommons and especially rares to be much more interesting. I have given my positives and negatives about aspects of 4e, and generally try to stay positive overall, but when it comes to magic items I really have nothing but bad things to say. They are so incredibly bland right now, that my players often don't even care if i put magic items in teh treasure.

 

[Mirtek]

How long until published adventures come in a box set, and that box set includes "DM cards", cards not for the DM, but replacing the DM. Sort of a choose your own adventure meets playing cards thing?

You might not be that far off. If I were a bean counter at WotC, the need for a DM would be one of D&D's biggest barriers to entry for me and the removal of that need would be high on my priority list for a more profitable D&D

 

[giant.robot]

You might not be that far off. If I were a bean counter at WotC, the need for a DM would be one of D&D's biggest barriers to entry for me and the removal of that need would be high on my priority list for a more profitable D&D

Based on the Ravenloft rulebook I think Wizards is trying this idea out. The encounter deck in the Ravenloft game with the way they do tiles and exploration go a long way to obviate the need for a singular referee, after all it is a board game. While I honestly doubt WotC is trying to obviate DMs entirely I do think they would like to give players the ability to play D&D games even if they can't find someone who wants to DM. A lot of players would be fine with just sitting down and hacking their way through a dungeon every once in a while. I'd bet that the Wrath of Ashardalon is going to be targeting at these groups of players.

 

[brainstorm]

Thats a good summary (and no, I still can't give you XP)

This kind of thinking has obviously been a big force in RPG (and some other game) design for 25 years. But, I think WotC found the limits of it.

-Not all buying is equal. Some people like to really buy books, these people also tend to DM, and that DMs buy a surprising amount of "player" oriented material. Other people hardly buy anything, they are always players.

-DMs drive the game. If they are unhappy, there is no game.

The new twist here is the DDI. Basically WotC wants a bunch of DMs to get players to get a bunch of DDI subscriptions. They may also buy some books. But the big purchasers remain DMs. And in fact WotCs new releases--all those box sets--are consistent with this.

I DM two groups of notoriously cheap players. Since 4E came out, they have all purchased a PHB and possibly a handful of subsequent books between them. I, on the other hand, have purchased nearly every book, I subscribe to DDI, have bought multiple sets of each Dungeon Tile set released and thousands of their miniatures. If WotC was doing it's job in identifying it's active customer base, it would be doing more to keep me happy that to try and entice my players to buy more. Quite frankly, all that players need is to show up on game night with a character sheet and no further investment is really necessary on their part.

 

[Aegeri]

I've never had a problem with banning or limiting options in my games, but I do not rule purely by fiat from my iron throne. I explain to my PCs why I am doing something and my logic behind it. Being willing to discuss things, like formerly banning warforged in FR (something I don't do anymore, because honestly, what is the point now with PHB3?) means PCs accept decisions much easier.

The new rules are good though, but I am undecided on the magical crafting and similar rules.

 

[Old Gumphrey]

formerly banning warforged in FR (something I don't do anymore, because honestly, what is the point now with PHB3?)

I don't follow your reasoning here.