A reason why 4E is not as popular as it could have been

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Erm, not quite true. When 2e was released 1e was still in print and Basic was either still in print or had just gone out of it. 1e and 2e overlapped by about 2 years, if memory serves: TSR was in essence competing with itself.

There was no overlap between 1st & 2nd edition AD&D. The final products of the BECMI line, Immortals and the Rules Cyclopedia were published in 1991, so there a two-year overlap between 2nd edition AD&D and BECMI/RC D&D. TSR had been competing with itself for 14 years by 1991 with the split between D&D and AD&D.

 

[Aeolius]

But I don't think it was a good idea to point to 4e and say, "This is the new D&D."

It wasn't so much WotC presenting 4e as the "new hawtness", but rather demeaning 3.5e as "old and busted" that made my first impression with the new edition. The ever-popular "D&D is a game about slaying horrible monsters, not a game about traipsing off through fairy rings and interacting with the little people." - James Wyatt, "Races and Classes" (pg. 34) comes to mind, here.

2e and 1e saw a split that, at least anecdotally, was just as wide as 3e to 4e...And there are many, many examples of people talking about how they skipped over 2e to start again with 3e.

As a self-proclaimed leap-grognard, I am guilty of both.

 

[billd91]

There was no overlap between 1st & 2nd edition AD&D. The final products of the BECMI line, Immortals and the Rules Cyclopedia were published in 1991, so there a two-year overlap between 2nd edition AD&D and BECMI/RC D&D. TSR had been competing with itself for 14 years by 1991 with the split between D&D and AD&D.

While it's true that TSR did have two D&D's around (AD&D and BECMI), 1e and 2e did overlap for about a year. The last printings of the 1e PH were in 1990, about a year after the release of 2e.

I would question whether the two versions of D&D were really competing. They may have been serving two similar and overlapping market segments. You certainly argue that, for fans of both, money spent on one couldn't be spent on the other, but to show much competition I think you'd have to make a convincing argument that the money would certainly have gone to the other in such a case. The end result may have been to actually extract more money out of fans of both than they'd have taken with just the one product line.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Once you've grasped what they are good for, skill challenges are easy to improvise with and a superb tool to use to improvise for off the wall PC plans. The guidance for doing this is, alas, poor.

In 4E, this problem is not limited to skill challenges, either. The encounter model is another example. And I'd say that WotC themselves still haven't really got the feat concept nailed down properly, despite two full versions taking a crack at it.

I'm both willing to cut them some slack for the lack of guidance and not. It's a tough thing to do. So some slack. It's also a lot more important than some other things--e.g. coming up with a different set of level 6 utilities for every class. So severe screw up in middle management on priorities.

If you do something sufficiently radically different from what came before, you need more guidance--especially guidance. There are not enough examples of play. This same failure of management occurs over and over in game design (and not just limited to WotC by any means). It reminds me of the dedication of a revised edition of a niche Visual Basic 6 book that I found hilarious.

The author wrote that when he finished the first edition, he got a few reviews. The books was hundreds of pages showing how VB 6 could get into the Windows modules. One reviewer sent one line: "More examples, Dammit!"

Like that guy, I can use the tool for its intended purpose. But you could pretty much substitute his review of that book as mine for 4E, and not change a thing.

 

[Aberzanzorax]

I'm not in agreement with the metaphor of one edition as fillet, the other as hamburger, or either as KFC.


To use a food related analogy, 3e was a full meal (including fillet mignon, mashed potatoes, salad, and -ugh- brussel srpouts). 4e is like fillet mignon, lots of it, a whole plateful, but no sides at all.

The intensity of the focus on combat (and I'll agree that all editions had as their "main dish", so to speak, combat) has shifted the balance of the "meal".


Or, to put it another way, I think wizards realized that cake is delicious...and then proceeded to feed us cake for every single meal. It's really really good cake, but one gets tired of cake.

 

[TheFindus]

4E is not as popular as it could have been, in my opinion, because it did away with too many things people thought the flavor of DnD as a rule system is.

I think there was a paradigm shift in the following three major areas, in which the designers of 4E underestimated the feelings/taste of the DnD crowd:
1. capabilities of spellcasters, the magic system in general really,
2. abilities of non-spellcasters (that are now called powers in 4E) and
3. the way healing is dealt with in 4E.

50% (just a guess) thought a change from this was desparetely needed. I am one of those and I am never going back. The other half plays 3.x/PF and older systems.

Now, if WotC had only adapted 3.5 to what, let's say, Pathfinder is today, they would have lost me. I needed a new system that I felt was innovative and balanced and I was not hooked on the iconic DnD flair like "Tomb of Horrors", "Temple of Elemental Evil", "Demogorgon/Orcus" or the entire cast of Tenser, Mordenkainen, etc.
But I see a lot of people who still want that feeling and will not play 4E because they think it lacks that.
So we play Warhammer together. With those who share my view, I play 4E.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Food again! Naw, that cake analogy is off, too. 4E is a complete meal at a fine establishment that doesn't offer you many choices. You can have the ribeye or the salmon or the chicken Florentine, and it will come with appropriate sides. If you absolutely must substitute the salmon's rice pilaf side for your ribeye, you can. But the chef will grumble, and the waiter will give you a gimlet stare for 3 seconds. Depending on your GM, you may be able to add other such meals, but it will always be a limited set.

Depending on the GM, 3E is anything from a hole in the wall buffet place with a 70 health rating, to this wonderful Greek place I used to frequent in Connecticut. They have pizza, pasta, several steak, 33 kinds of fish, and yes, even chicken Florentine. They've got a wine cellar, and three different ways to get it with your meal, including a single glass in a package. Several things are pretty good. A few are truly excellent (well, at the Greek place, not so much the nameless buffet place). But you know, the sphaghetti comes in a giant bowl, and it is impressive, but it really isn't very good. For the population as a whole, you can go there and everyone find something they like. But each person will only like a small subset of the menu.

That doesn't mean that the 4E fine establishment is going to be a better alternative for you. It does mean that for many of the things that people want, there will be a better alternative than the 3E place. Of course, one has to take into account what everyone in the group wants, and convenience, too.

 

[oldgamergeek]

I don't think it's a lack of a supported setting. I play Pathfinder and I don't even support the Golarion setting, after all. I would identify:

- Lack of Gygaxian Naturalism
- Competing with a recently published, successful version of the game rather than the degenerate, overpublished gasps of a game in its waning years
- Monomaniacal focus on combat and skill set pieces instead of continuity
- Indigestible rules bulk even at 1st level

Add to this a the worst economy in years and it's no wonder it cant sell.
I have played and learned to enjoy a little 4e but that little goes a long way.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I'm not in agreement with the metaphor of one edition as fillet, the other as hamburger, or either as KFC.


To use a food related analogy, 3e was a full meal (including fillet mignon, mashed potatoes, salad, and -ugh- brussel srpouts). 4e is like fillet mignon, lots of it, a whole plateful, but no sides at all.

The intensity of the focus on combat (and I'll agree that all editions had as their "main dish", so to speak, combat) has shifted the balance of the "meal".


Or, to put it another way, I think wizards realized that cake is delicious...and then proceeded to feed us cake for every single meal. It's really really good cake, but one gets tired of cake.

I'm not disagreeing. But to take your first food analogy, 3e comes with indifferently cooked and very heavily spiced vegetables already on the plate. Sure, it's a full meal. But the vegetables don't to me taste good - far far too much spice. Which will remain even if you try to serve your own vegetables. And although the menu is massive, the actual choice amounts to "You can have anything you like as long as it's curry." 4e on the other hand comes with a bowl full of vegetables that most people confuse with packing material (and with good reason) that needn't make it as far as the plates. It also comes with some very good vegetables on the supplemental menu (the Eberron and Dark Sun Campaign Guides) although far fewer of them than on the 2e and 3e supplemental menus. Or I can cook my own vegetables - and I like cooking. I simply can't match the quality of 4e's meat. But between the prime salmon, the ribeye steak, or the chicken florentine there's enough variety that I'm unlikely to have a clash of my vegetables with the meat dish. Unlike 3e's strong curries which are just going to make most vegetables I cook seem ... bland beside them.

Or to borrow from a Pathfinder/4e thread, "Pathfinder does very well the things I enjoy doing for myself. 4e does very well the things I have real problems doing for myself." (Paraphrased)

And [MENTION=29358]Crazy[/MENTION]-Jerome, there's one serious problem IME with trying to write down examples of skill challenges the way I use them. It's like trying to bottle lightning. The specific PC ideas help determine the DCs at least as much as what skills they are using. And I must get round to finishing writing up my guide to skill challenges.

 

[Diamond Cross]

So if I ended the pig overpopulation problem in Texas and the south (no metaphor intended at all), would 4e be more popular?