D&D 5E Monte Cook Leaves WotC - No Longer working on D&D Next [updated]

[Greg K]

Also i think lots of people bought the first three core 4e books(i know i did). But a large chunk ended up not liking it and playing just a few sessions. So it wouldn't surprise me if they did pretty okay out of the gate only to hit a steep decline soon after.

There were several people on ENWorld (and, if I recall correctly, WOTC's forums) that stated they were preordering 4,5 or even 6 copies for their group long before there were any previews of the actual rules. As you note many of them later regretted their purchase and sold them after reading the book and giving the game a try, There were also several of those people that had bought multiple couples, who found that the people for whom they bought those extra copies had no interest in trying 4e.

The funny thing is that we are already seeing people stating that they are sold on 5e when the game is not even finished.

 

[Redbadge]

First, Player's Handbook 2 sold nearly as many copies as the core, something splat books never do (we can argue I guess whether or not PHB2 counts as a splat book, but it pretty clearly does). So while some people bought the core and then abandoned the system immediately, we're not really talking about a significant number here.

Second, liked we've discussed, this perception of failure only exists on sites like EnWorld. And if you've seen this negative perception elsewhere, as we've established, this is because no matter where you go, you're bringing these perceptions with you, so there they are. I guarantee this perception of failure just doesn't extend to mainstream consumers. The only people that are aware of the so-called "edition wars" are its participants.

Now obviously, WotC doesn't want to alienate its most devoted customers (those so few devoted that visit sites like EnWorld) like it has in the past. These people are the ones that do buy *alot* of splatbooks and spread the word as it were. Thus, it makes no sense whatsoever to discount 4e players, even in favor of retro players. They should do their best to make both sets of players enthusiastic as possible to buy the core. There is absolutely no argument for leaning towards/favoring/defaulting to *any* specific system at the expense of another.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Second, liked we've discussed, this perception of failure only exists on sites like EnWorld. And if you've seen this negative perception elsewhere, as we've established, this is because no matter where you go, you're bringing these perceptions with you, so there they are. I guarantee this perception of failure just doesn't extend to mainstream consumers. The only people that are aware of the so-called "edition wars" are its participants.

actually i see a lot more of this in the actual gaming community than online. Of all the gaming groups I was involved ith during the entire run of 3e, i only know one player that fully adopted 4e and made the switch over. At the local hobby shop the split has been more like fifty-fifty.

 

[Remus Lupin]

Second, liked we've discussed, this perception of failure only exists on sites like EnWorld. And if you've seen this negative perception elsewhere, as we've established, this is because no matter where you go, you're bringing these perceptions with you, so there they are. I guarantee this perception of failure just doesn't extend to mainstream consumers. The only people that are aware of the so-called "edition wars" are its participants.

But this is the equivalent of saying "the perception of failure exists only among those who know the most about the game and care the most about its future. I'm not sure that's any better news!

And I'm not sure it's true. As others have noted, if these conversations are also taking place at FLGS's and around the table, then it's wider spread than you seem to be crediting.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

But this is the equivalent of saying "the perception of failure exists only among those who know the most about the game and care the most about its future. I'm not sure that's any better news!

And I'm not sure it's true. As others have noted, if these conversations are also taking place at FLGS's and around the table, then it's wider spread than you seem to be crediting.

4E is a failure only so much as individual people need it to be a failure.

 

[Remus Lupin]

4E is a failure only so much as individual people need it to be a failure.

Well I don't need it to be a failure. My point is that even the fact that this is a constant topic of conversation reinforces the perception that it's a failure. And it's not about individuals, it's about a widespread perception. The fact that the conversation is "haveable" is bad news for 4e any way you slice it.

Nobody is having this debate about Pathfinder.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

Something that keeps popping up is the excuse about Wizards making their profit goals unreasonable so that is why 4th edition failed. It's almost like 4fans are hanging on to this for dear life because to them, it wasn't their edition that failed bu the company.

I don't buy this. D&D has never ever been a mega bucks product. Why would they suddenly expect 4th edition to break that notion and bring in those mega bucks?

The fact of the matter is, the edition was cut early, Monte Cook was brought in to lead the new one, the announcement of the new edition was early(which I believe was to make those leaving the game stop and wait just a little longer to see what 5th edition was all about), people like Bill S were let go, and they started working on the next edition after only 2 years.

There is something fundamental out there and it's the fact that if the game was doing so well then we wouldn't be where we are now. Blaming it on Wizards is just too easy.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

Well I don't need it to be a failure. My point is that even the fact that this is a constant topic of conversation reinforces the perception that it's a failure. And it's not about individuals, it's about a widespread perception. The fact that the conversation is "haveable" is bad news for 4e any way you slice it.

This perception exists much more often amongst those who didn't like it and/or didn't adopt it. This "widespread perception" is a self-reinforcing belief.

Nobody is having this debate about Pathfinder.

Nobody expects Pathfinder to make 50 million in sales every year. A lot of folks were surprised it even thrived at all. It's all about relative position. It's the proverbial David to D&D/WotC's Goliath.

 

[Remus Lupin]

Wait, I think I missed a step here -- It's Wizards' product. If it is indeed a failure, then who else's fault would it be?

 

[Remus Lupin]

This perception exists much more often amongst those who didn't like it and/or didn't adopt it. This "widespread perception" is a self-reinforcing belief.

Nobody expects Pathfinder to make 50 million in sales every year. A lot of folks were surprised it even thrived at all. It's all about relative position. It's the proverbial David to D&D/WotC's Goliath.

Which is essentially my point.