Editions in RPGs - and why we should embrace change

[rogueattorney]

I am far more interested in getting new and different games than getting another edition of a game I already have.

I wish rpg companies put out more different games and fewer supplements to games.

 

[S'mon]

4e was a radically new game. Personally I feel it was released before it was ready, it needed another year or so of playtesting to get it right. And I'm not an early adopter; I didn't start playing/DMing 4e until 2009, and I didn't start buying loads of 4e books until really this year. I think it took me about 5 years to get the hang of 3e, I am just starting to get the hang of 4e; I don't think I'd be interested in a new game for at least 5-6 years; and another new "D&D" would probably tend to drive me away from the D&D brand. If I abandoned 4e I'd probably seek out a more stable platform, probably Pathfinder, rather than a 5e D&D that was only going to be invalidated by a 6e D&D in a few years.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

4e was a radically new game. Personally I feel it was released before it was ready, it needed another year or so of playtesting to get it right. And I'm not an early adopter; I didn't start playing/DMing 4e until 2009, and I didn't start buying loads of 4e books until really this year. I think it took me about 5 years to get the hang of 3e, I am just starting to get the hang of 4e; I don't think I'd be interested in a new game for at least 5-6 years; and another new "D&D" would probably tend to drive me away from the D&D brand. If I abandoned 4e I'd probably seek out a more stable platform, probably Pathfinder, rather than a 5e D&D that was only going to be invalidated by a 6e D&D in a few years.

This leads to an interesting question why does the current edition matter? Why not continue with 4e and simply ignore 5e>

 

[Reynard]

This leads to an interesting question why does the current edition matter? Why not continue with 4e and simply ignore 5e>

I think there is a very real possibility of a 5E splitting the base even more and WotC has to be aware of that possibility. I imagine the solution will be either to figure out a way to re-sell 4E to it's current fans, or to concentrate on non-RPG related D&D branded items (ie board games). It's certainly too soon after Essentials for the former, and it sure looks like they are giving the latter a shot.

Even though I do not play 4E, I am curious to see how it develops, especially with GenCon right around the corner. Maybe they'll decide to try and bring lost players back to the fold by supporting legacy editions. Maybe they will open up the game with a relaxed GSL.

 

[Alan Shutko]

This leads to an interesting question why does the current edition matter? Why not continue with 4e and simply ignore 5e>

That's basically what I've done, by sticking with earlier editions. I'm concerned that the business model is based on putting out products until you glut the market, then switching the ruleset and doing the same products again with different mechanics. I think the edition wars we've had are a reflection on this business model. Each time the cycle rolls around, you lose some percentage of your players. At the same time you hope to gain enough new players to make up the revenue. In other words, churn is inherent in the business model.

Chaosium isn't dependent on this business model, but at the same time they aren't as big as WotC, so they don't have the same need to keep putting out product that ends up saturating the market.

Maybe Wizards of the Coast is too large in too small a market to have a business model that I would like.

 

[Umbran]

World of Darkness
1991+, 2004

You're massively under-counting, here. The major World of Darkness games each went through an initial edition, a 2nd edition, a revised edition, and then the reboot to the New World of Darkness.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

One of the main reasons new edtions don't bother me is that I haven't invested all that much in any one edition. Of course, one of the reasons that I don't, is that I expect new editions. It is rather circular.

It wasn't a choice with 1E and Basic. I got a handful of things that I could afford in my teens, and then picked up the RC later. With 2E, I mainly opted out, until I bought some of the FR supplements (late in the cycle) for use with Fantasy Hero. With 3E, I got the core rules, and a handful of the first round of supplements, and then some selected third party stuff. (And some of these, I picked up for $5.00 each in close out sales.) I own one 3.5 book. With 4E, I haven't even got the PHB 3 or MM 3, much less all the supplements. (I think I have two.). I've got 2 or 3 Essentials books.

It's a lot of stuff, collectively. But it isn't overwhelming. I'm the same way with any system I get into. My theory is that not every book in the line of a given edition is gonna be a killer product.

But I still think if WotC wants to double-down on DDI, they should do the game first in DDI, with a Beta, and then subscriber-only play. Then when it is humming like mad, print a set of books that incorporate the best of play. Get in early; do it their way. Or wait a bit, and get the best material of the edition.

 

[billd91]

This leads to an interesting question why does the current edition matter? Why not continue with 4e and simply ignore 5e>

There are a few reasons:
1) Injection of new material - if the games aren't highly compatible, adjusting new materials to old rules takes more time and effort - both of which may be scarce depending on your schedule and commitments

2) Ease of recruiting new players - out of print stuff is often harder to obtain (and increasingly so) than new materials, not an insignificant issue when trying to recruit new players and get them copies of the rules

Of course, you can always stick with an older edition. But these two factors tend to work against you for long term gaming.

 

[Bleys Icefalcon]

Nonexistent chance of me purchasing, much less even reading 5E if/when it comes out. Too much time, effort, passion, and money invested in 3X to convert/start over. If these new editions were actual updates to the game, instead of trying to "reinvent" the game at every turn, that might allow me to open my narrow view somewhat. I found 4E to be Dungeons and Dragons in name only, it was an alien game to me. I was able to switch from my rpesious 5" by 8" Pamphlets to Advanced, from Advanced to 2nd, from 2nd to 3.0, then on to 3.5 - with relatively little difficulty. I draw the line when it changes so much that it becomes actual work, like a friggin job, to convert/translate lore, abilities, skills, spells, classes - and in some cases races - from one edition to the next. With the leap from 3.5 to 4.0 I found myself in a new game. A different game. An unfamiliar game. An uncomfortable game. And ultimately a game I didn't enjoy. Is 5E if/when it comes out going to be an expansion/update to 3.5? Doubtful. Hence my utter disinterest.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

There are a few reasons:
1) Injection of new material - if the games aren't highly compatible, adjusting new materials to old rules takes more time and effort - both of which may be scarce depending on your schedule and commitments

2) Ease of recruiting new players - out of print stuff is often harder to obtain (and increasingly so) than new materials, not an insignificant issue when trying to recruit new players and get them copies of the rules

Of course, you can always stick with an older edition. But these two factors tend to work against you for long term gaming.

I live in rural Ireland and gamers are pretty thin on the ground. So whenever I have ,managed to recruit any gamers I have always been the sole person with gaming material.
So I wonder, does living in places with more active gaming communities create more pressure to run the latest material?