D&D (2024) People on this forum are creating confusion. Not WotC.

[MGibster]

4e was harmed by a few people spreading anecdotes and rumors.

I thought 4E was mostly harmed by not being a very good game. And I was one of those people who was looking forward to its release, but once I sat down and played it a few times I realized it wasn't the game for me.

 

[Velderan]

4e was harmed by being undercooked and not enough runs through a editor and some playtesting.

Not saying you're right or wrong, because I don't have any real opinions about 4e but it would be interesting to see q comparison for each edition of the game and how long it took to get them from concept approved by management as a product being developed to a final product that went on store shelves.

 

[Oofta]

My perspective on this is that 4E was pushed out before it was ready. They had an idea how to make wizards work and then due to time constraints were told to use the same pattern for all classes. Throw in a lack of playtesting. It had some interesting ideas, but I burned out on it towards the end of it's life cycle.

With 5E, they went the other direction, looked at old editions and tried to pull in things that worked while including a grab-bag of things from all previous editions including 4E. The main area where they may have misstepped is focusing too much on old school dungeons as their base assumption. But at the time, the only people around who cared enough included a fair number of old school gamers. On the other hand, I'm still happy with the game even if I think it could use a tune-up.

Now with this edition? They're listening to a lot of new voices, voices I may personally not agree with. But they at least seem to be continuing the processes that worked for 5E. Are they listening to too many blowhards (I can huff and puff as well as anyone at times) on the internet? I don't know ... it could also just be what they're seeing from the survey feedback.

My primary concern with the 2024 edition is the hard deadline. Having a deadline set before you even start a project is generally never a good idea. In any case, I'm not going to judge the stew before it's even cooked. I have no idea what parts, if any, of the 2024 edition I'm going to adopt. But even if it includes some things I disagree with, that's okay. Nothing is ever perfect, I don't see them making truly radical changes ala 4E, so I'm hopeful. Time will tell.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Ok. I refer to the recent threads about the new Crawford Video, the 8th June statement about the game and every similar thread before. Everywhere people call the game 5.5 and so on and say WotC is creating confusion, when I see quite clear communication.

I agree with the main thrust of your argument, but I'd caution two things:

1) You're going to have to be VERY diplomatic if you want to avoid having this thread throw more fuel on the fire and cause more harm than it does good.

2) You ought to consider that while there might be some people who are knowingly trying to cause confusion, most people who are doing it are much more likely to be being STUBBORN, not malicious. (In that they legitimately found something confusing early on, and are holding onto that, in spite of it being explained). Or in other words: consider being charitable to your rivals.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I thought 4E was mostly harmed by not being a very good game. And I was one of those people who was looking forward to its release, but once I sat down and played it a few times I realized it wasn't the game for me.

I liked it for quite a while. It was good for strategic combats that took hours to play out. It was not as good for progressing in an adventure.

 

[Emberashh]

Confusion about what?

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

I thought 4E was mostly harmed by not being a very good game. And I was one of those people who was looking forward to its release, but once I sat down and played it a few times I realized it wasn't the game for me.

Can we not edition war please. 4e was a very good game, just not everyone’s taste.

Personally I think 4e is a better design than 5e, but I enjoy playing 5e more. I like them both more than 1e, 2e, & 3e.

And with regard to the OP, I too think WotC has been clear and it is us fans that are creating the confusion.

 

[MGibster]

Can we not edition war please. 4e was a very good game, just not everyone’s taste.

Stating my opinion of 4th edition is not edition warring. I don't agree that it was a very good game and I find it laughable that anyone would say it was harmed by a few people spreading anecdotes and rumors. It's okay if you think it's a good game. But you've got to recognize that it was a contentious edition of D&D that drove many people right into the arms of Paizo.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

I find it laughable that anyone would say it was harmed by a few people spreading anecdotes and rumors.

To be clear I never said that. IMO, it failed for the same reasons 1e, 2e, and 3e failed: not enough sales

 

[Corinnguard]

4e was harmed by a few people spreading anecdotes and rumors.

4e tried to reinvent everything. If you are going to create a new edition, you keep what works and you fix what didn't work.

I did buy several 4e books. And while they were interesting at first, I just felt that 4e wasn't D&D. So when Pathfinder 1st edition debuted, I jumped ship and began collecting it's books for fun.