[forked thread] What constitutes an edition war?

[catastrophic]

I think the reason Mearls and WOTC is courting old fans is that the new edition is not selling as well as they hoped and want some of that business back. Believe me a lot of this has to do with bottom dollar.

Why do you think 4e fans would buy a 5e designed to appeal to fans like you?

We'll just do what most of you lot did and play a rebranded knockoff, with the added advantage that ours will actually be worth playing.

The bottom dollar is that no company can survive by pandering to ex-fans who are angry at them for imagined insults and even more imaginary design concepts.

Nor can they do it by creating a game that is deliberatly less fun for new people who say things like 'I want to play a guy with a sword' or 'I don't want to just sit around and heal people'. Old school design isn't more immersive or naritivist, it's just bad. That's why they fixed it.

The backlash against 4e is many things, but a valid business opportunity for wotc it is not. Paizo already siezed the brass ring for that one, wotc can't take it back, least of all by by making the same mistake again, and alienating the people who are currently buying it's books.

Personally, I have no doubt that if we ever see a 5e, it will be stocked to the gills with pandering, while also trying to appeal to 4e players.

And it will fail to bridge that gap, because most of the people bashing 4e will not be happy unless the brilliant improvements made in it are sufficiently damaged to appease them.

The problem is, if that happens, me and all my book-buying, subscription-having buddies wil simply not buy it. After all- we know bad design when we see it.

So either redbadge is right, and this is about, frankly, spin, in which case, the haters won't come back, or i'm right, and 5e will be essentials + 3.75, in which case 4e fans won't buy it.

 

[Nagol]

I think part of the problem of this thread is that 4e "fanboys" are being too defensive and emotional, when there is nothing needed to be defended. 4e is the best game by far, best at narration, best at simulation, and best at gaming. The problem, as mentioned in the posts above, is that WotC's presentation and marketing of the system was very poor, and now they're trying to change that. The presentation can be approved, but I think we can all agree that 4e is otherwise the best edition so far.

I beliive you'll find that there is no such agreement. People have entirely different perspectives on what makes a RPG good/better/best. That's why it's great to have a large variety of product to choose from.

 

[Redbadge]

So either redbadge is right, and this is about, frankly, spin, in which case, the haters won't come back, or i'm right, and 5e will be essentials + 3.75, in which case 4e fans won't buy it.

Well, I might buy it, but I probably wouldn't play it. One of my first posts, reposted here for its relevancy:

I've played every edition of Dungeons and Dragons and many other RPGs besides. D&D 4e has provided me better experiences and more fun, both as player and GM, than any other system by far. If preferring the 4e design makes me a "kid", as described in the post above, I'll wear that title proudly.

I'd be extremely happy if 5th edition continued the design started by 4th edition, perhaps with better communication in intent and design from WotC and more ingrained flavor to draw in parts of the fractured player base. Raven Crowking has previously mentioned a possible "pendulum swing" back towards the design of earlier editions, and while I enjoy Essentials, anything more than that in 5th edition would greatly disappoint me. A fractured player base doesn't mean a lot to me, either now or going forward, because I can easily find people that love 4th edition as much as I do. In that case, I would obviously like WotC to take their resources and make an even better version of the game me and my friends enjoy now, regardless of whether or not everyone else would like it. As long as WotC sells enough of this system to keep trying and keep developing new support, hey, works for me.

However, even if 5th edition is nothing like 4th edition, and goes backwards in ways I dislike, well, my greatest system ever has already been invented, with plenty of support. I can easily play 4th edition for the next 25 years (despite the assertions of RCK). At most, I lose the online character builder and compendium, but oh well. If 5th edition, and 6th edition, and 7th edition don't match up with the greatness of 4e, I'll be staying with 4e. It's the same reason I switched from 3.5 to 4e; I naturally play the system I find better. I'd expect most supporters of early editions to feel the same.

Given this, I suppose it's selfish to expect more awesome stuff from WotC, just to please me and others like me. Though I would be disappointed that I couldn't look forward to new stuff every month if 5th edition significantly changed for the worse, I wouldn't begrudge Raven Crowking and other like him from getting their wish for a couple of editions. (After all, I find the editions wars and hearty design discussion fun, as long as no one insults the debaters themselves, badwrongfun and all that). Edited to add: Who knows, I may even end up liking such as direction (I would still buy the core books).

 

[Redbadge]

I beliive you'll find that there is no such agreement. People have entirely different perspectives on what makes a RPG good/better/best. That's why it's great to have a large variety of product to choose from.

Aha, but I said we can all agree, not that we do. If any one who currently doesn't like 4e, as long as they truly liked RPGs (story, pretend, fantasy, immersion in another role, and all that), played a handful of sessions with me or a person with a similar perspective as me, we would all agree that 4e is best, of this I have no doubt (because I've seen it happen more than once before, with the most diehard of grognards*).

*said with admiration and respect

 

[Aberzanzorax]

Aha, but I said we can all agree, not that we do. If any one who currently doesn't like 4e, as long as they truly liked RPGs (story, pretend, fantasy, immersion in another role, and all that), played a handful of sessions with me or a person with a similar perspective as me, we would all agree that 4e is best, of this I have no doubt (because I've seen it happen more than once before, with the most diehard of grognards*).

*said with admiration and respect

You must be a better DM than my DM of 8 years who switched over to 4e then.

Because I left his 4e game firmly unconvinced (played several sessions and played two different types of characters).




(Not that it's a bad game, but I don't find it to be the best.)

Seriously though, it's VERY silly to claim any one game is the "best". You can claim it is for you, sure. But to claim it's universally best? Silly.

I'd say the same if anyone claimed Pathfinder, 3e, World of Darkness, GURPS, Call of Cthulu, etc etc were best.


Thinking in this way "this game is clearly best" is I think one of the attitudes behind edition warring. It doesn't leave room for "that is also good, maybe AS good".

 

[Nagol]

Aha, but I said we can all agree, not that we do. If any one who currently doesn't like 4e, as long as they truly liked RPGs (story, pretend, fantasy, immersion in another role, and all that), played a handful of sessions with me or a person with a similar perspective as me, we would all agree that 4e is best, of this I have no doubt (because I've seen it happen more than once before, with the most diehard of grognards*).

*said with admiration and respect

I respectfully disagree. A particular person may run a great game for many others, but they will not run the perfect game for everyone. There are too many perspectives and desires for any particular game or any particular game master to be consdiered 'the best' by everyone. In my case, for example, some editions of D&D are go-to games for some particular genres and game choices and other versions get mined for some game ideas and never run as themselves. Other genres and/or game choices have entirely different game systems as there go-to choice.

 

[Imaro]

Why do you think 4e fans would buy a 5e designed to appeal to fans like you?

Who said we expected you too? Maybe WotC has realised we spend more money, support our game more or whatever and has decided that it's actually the 4e fan base that could be sacrificed to make a better profit...

We'll just do what most of you lot did and play a rebranded knockoff, with the added advantage that ours will actually be worth playing.

Well here's to hoping some company out there somewhere considers 4e worth it form a profit perspective to do this... oh, and chooses to do it with the creativity and production values of Paizo. Hope springs eternal, and I definitely don't begrudge you the opportunity to keep playing the game you believe is superior.

The bottom dollar is that no company can survive by pandering to ex-fans who are angry at them for imagined insults and even more imaginary design concepts.

Who made the claim that a company could. As far as Paizo goes... the proof is in the pudding, whatever it is they're doing... they're doing it right. They aren't just "surviving" they are prospering and growing.

Nor can they do it by creating a game that is deliberatly less fun for new people who say things like 'I want to play a guy with a sword' or 'I don't want to just sit around and heal people'. Old school design isn't more immersive or naritivist, it's just bad. That's why they fixed it.

I've introduced new gamers to Pathfinder... they had fun... subjective opinion, is well... a subjective opinion. But hey you keep stating it like it's fact.

The backlash against 4e is many things, but a valid business opportunity for wotc it is not. Paizo already siezed the brass ring for that one, wotc can't take it back, least of all by by making the same mistake again, and alienating the people who are currently buying it's books.

Maybe you guys should buy more of their books... support the company and maybe then they wouldn't be reconsidering their design, cancelling products for D&D and considering new directions. Just saying, money talks...

Personally, I have no doubt that if we ever see a 5e, it will be stocked to the gills with pandering, while also trying to appeal to 4e players.

And it will fail to bridge that gap, because most of the people bashing 4e will not be happy unless the brilliant improvements made in it are sufficiently damaged to appease them.

The problem is, if that happens, me and all my book-buying, subscription-having buddies wil simply not buy it. After all- we know bad design when we see it.

Subjective opinion is... oh, yeah I covered that above...

So either redbadge is right, and this is about, frankly, spin, in which case, the haters won't come back, or i'm right, and 5e will be essentials + 3.75, in which case 4e fans won't buy it.

No I don't think redbadge is correct in his very broad and simplistic generalization... and I think WotC will take option C... assess where the money is and cater to that marketshare. I mean 4e fans are warring alread over "true 4e" vs. "essentials 4e"... you guys are already a fractured player base and it isn't even a new edition.

 

[Imaro]

Aha, but I said we can all agree, not that we do. If any one who currently doesn't like 4e, as long as they truly liked RPGs (story, pretend, fantasy, immersion in another role, and all that), played a handful of sessions with me or a person with a similar perspective as me, we would all agree that 4e is best, of this I have no doubt (because I've seen it happen more than once before, with the most diehard of grognards*).

*said with admiration and respect

... uhm, yeah...ok...glad you clarified that.

 

[pawsplay]

I'm not even sure what to say to this... So you think Mike Mearls is just given free reign to develop D&D however he wants... and there are no checks, balances and restrictions from on high on the type of products and design space he has to develop in??? Why does WotC even do market research for D&D... I mean they're going to let Mearls do whatever he wants, right? So why waste the money on it?

Game design is such an art, I don't think you can formulate what works. Of course it's his decision.... a game designer's best effort that they think is cool is probably one of the better designs you are going to get out of them. Of course, if you think you can get 2% more profits doing a little backseat designing, go ahead and burn out Mike Mearls on your project. Independence is both a blessing a curse.

Honestly, 4e is obviously the product of the WotC designers doing whatever the whatooiee they felt like, either with the blessing of management, or the tactic acceptance by suits who don't understand the game anyway. 4e is a textbook example of a creative group of people doing something really amazing by following their own instincts. Unofortunately, the zeitgeist is not as happy with the result as perhaps some had hoped, but that's the risk of daring to do something good.

I think 4e is pretty stinkie, but there is no doubt in my mind a lot of people are proud to have designed it, and it provides genuine enjoyment for many of the people who play it.

 

[Redbadge]

Seriously though, it's VERY silly to claim any one game is the "best". You can claim it is for you, sure. But to claim it's universally best? Silly.

I'd say the same if anyone claimed Pathfinder, 3e, World of Darkness, GURPS, Call of Cthulu, etc etc were best.


Thinking in this way "this game is clearly best" is I think one of the attitudes behind edition warring. It doesn't leave room for "that is also good, maybe AS good".

I can be a silly person, but also optimistic, confidant, and enthusiastic (good qualities for a DM, by the by). When I say 4e is "best", I don't mean that any other system is bad. I've actually said the opposite. What I mean is that on average, players using the 4e system will have a little more fun, a little more often, and given a choice players will choose that system most of the time. If the 4e system was built with the Pathfinder presentation, it would be even better.

I mean compare 4e to 3.5. 4e is basically 3.5, but with more fun and colorful options (after all, a 4e wizard can summon a red dragon at-will at level 1, if he wants, while the 3.5 wizard is probably using a crossbow most of the time at level 1) with fewer restrictions. Note that a 4e wizard can still use a crossbow if he wants.

Basically, 4e has everything and can do anything that earlier editions could do, but they added more for those that wanted to take advantage of it. By most accounts, better.