D&D 3E/3.5 3.5 is the REAL reason everyone is angry

[Mr. Patient]

The fact is that Wizards doesn't have to put out a new D&D supplement every month or a new D&D edition every 5 years or so to keep D&D from losing money.

...

I'm not sure anyone around here is against Wizards making a profit. We can, however, have different opinions on how best they could go about doing so.

But with all due respect, our opinions on the subject are worth exactly squat. The fans know nothing about Wizards' ability to generate profits from an ongoing 3.5 line. In fact, since Wizards chose to announce 4e now, I think we can probably surmise that their confidence in making continued profits from 3.5 is somewhat lower than yours.

 

[Syltorian]

Its not a question of whether I can afford to reinvest in 4e. The question is do I (or SHARK) have the energy and will to do so?

Beyond price and energy, it is a question in confidence in WotC. I'm not even talking here whether their comment on 4th Edition being a "long way off" was an outright lie, merely stretching the truth or a clever composition to make us understand the wrong thing. I'm not even mentioning the recent battery of decisions that many of us have not quite stomached yet (moving the magazines online, etc), which came too close together to let some of us believe they really care (as they claim).

It's also a question, as has been mentioned above, on whether it's worthwhile investing in this if they're coming up with a "better" system in 2012. Whether or not a new edition is needed from a business standpoint, eventually people will get fed up with them succeeding each other. They'll keep on with new players and those who will play along, but every time, they are losing some of their hitherto loyal customers, as little as that matters for the business figures.

Am I supposed to buy 4.0 versions of all the books I got so far, just so I can buy 5.0 ones in a few years' time? Because, if, as some have claimed, issuing new editions is what makes the business bring in money, that's inevitable. In my opinion, 3.5 could have continued on quite merrily, especially if they provided say a Rules Compendium to bring clarification and unity to it... without necessitating an overhaul. Add new material, errata, variants - above all, keep it compatible, offer options and ways of bringing them in in a clear, uncomplicated way; perhaps in the way of Unearthed Arcana.

But no. I will not fall for it again. It won't last anyway, and I have better things to do than to worry how long these books will be useful before I have to upgrade again. I'll stick with my 3.x stuff, maybe invest otherwise in some Ravenloft material, check out Paizo if they stay with 3.5. I might house-rule in some rules from 4.0, if I can make them compatible. I won't boycott the company out of spite - I'll go on buying Eberron stuff and material that helps flavour - but unless 4th Edition is far more compatible with 3.5 than I fear, and unless I can easily rewrite and adapt the PrCs, feats, Sandstorm terrain rules, spells and even some UA variant rules into it, I'll stick with 3.5 in general.

 

[SPoD]

The fact is that Wizards doesn't have to put out a new D&D supplement every month or a new D&D edition every 5 years or so to keep D&D from losing money. They don't have to do it to keep the company as a whole from losing money. As long as the D&D products that are in print are making a profit, Hasbro doesn't need to axe it.

What NEEDS to be done and what IS done are not necessarily the same thing. If Hasbro thinks it can make MORE money by selling the D&D brand to someone than WOTC is bringing in, then they might go to WOTC and say, "Hey, you better triple your profits next year or you're all out of a job." Then WOTC is in the unfortunate position of trying to do that, and maybe 4E gets moved up from a 2009-2010 schedule to a 2008 schedule, because what else could ever make that much money?

In the world of business, "not actually losing money, per se," is not enough reason for a product to exist. It has to make money, and lots of it, or its owner will find another way to squeeze blood from that particular stone.

 

[Fifth Element]

I'm trying to provide an honest contribution to this discussion without snark, while I disagree with a few of the people here I'm not going to deride them. If you can't discuss this without snarky comments then keep them to yourself or take it to PM.

Are you saying that you wanted an announcement to announce the subject matter of their upcoming announcement?

I'm not trying to be snarky, but your argument that 8 months constitutes "NO WARNING" (in all caps, no less), or that their announcement should have had a pre-announcement (which would eliminate the need for the announcement) seems absurd to me.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

Are you saying that you wanted an announcement to announce the subject matter of their upcoming announcement?

I'm not trying to be snarky, but your argument that 8 months constitutes "NO WARNING" (in all caps, no less), or that their announcement should have had a pre-announcement (which would eliminate the need for the announcement) seems absurd to me.

See post 105 as to how I answered pretty much that same question to someone who didnt come at me with a snarky comment right out of the gate.

I see a big difference between saying "We're working on a 4th Edition now" and saying "4th Edition is coming in May 2008. We've been working on it for the past two years and it's all done but the playtesting."

If you don't think there's a difference, then that's on you. But for me the first would have probably been said at least a year ago and would have forced me to re-evaluate any 3.5 purchases I would have made over that time. The second pretty much says (for now, newer info could invalidate this) that all of your 3.5 material / crunch (of which I have ALOT) is going to be useless with the new version.

To go back to the earlier Apple analogy, at least OSX allowed OS 9 apps to run in emulation for a long time before they forced people to purchase OS X native apps. Right now it seems like 3.5 material / crunch might be incompatible with 4.0. If that we'rent the case then it would have been touted as a feature of 4.0 right off the bat. Once again going with the software revs that WOTC seems to be following (3.0, 3.5, 4.0), when the PS3, XBox 360 and the Wii were announced, one of the first things that was mentioned was that they were backward compatible with the older games. Granted, it took a while for Sony to get that part right, but it was touted as a feature. There's no such mention of that in 4.0 announcement.

All I'm saying is this: if counsole manufactures, which are without a doubt more competative and bigger buisness than RPG's can let thier fan base know that yeah, the PS3 is in development a few years before announcing the actual release date of the counsole, there's no reason why WOTC couldnt just come out and say that "yeah, we're working on 4th. It wont be out for a while, but we'll let you know more when we're ready to announce. We've been listening to your problems with 3.5 and we're working to make the game more streamlined and easier to play. If you want an idea of where the game is headed look no further than SW Saga Edition/Tome of Battle..." Whatever. You get the idea.

That's how I see it. I know that you see it differently and that's fine. Hell, I may actually be dead frakkin' WRONG, but it doesn't mean that my POV is automatically worthy of derision.

 

[Droogie]

I personally found the fuss over 3.5 bizarre.

I mean, other companies put out new versions every two years or so, with no real ill-will. Consider Call of Cthulhu; every three years or so they put out a new version that basically consists of altering some fonts, and nobody has a problem with it. White Wolf has gone through four versions of their World of Darkness, Hero is on its 5th edition, and you need a supercomputer to keep track of the Traveller editions. Yet for some reason, if a new version of D&D comes out any faster than a decade, people flip out. Go fig.

Not everyone. I, for one, think D&D should have been on its 6th edition by now.

 

[Gargauth]

I'm worried about the developers essentially saying "don't bother" when dealing with the issue of converting modules/characters/campaigns from 3.5 to 4. That is why I don't think most of the software or Chaosium comparisons/metaphors work. Hell, even Microsoft lets you convert a file from an old to a new system. If I didn't have the sinking feeling that I can't really do much in 4th with any of my 3.5 mega-adventures I would be alot happier.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I see a big difference between saying "We're working on a 4th Edition now" and saying "4th Edition is coming in May 2008. We've been working on it for the past two years and it's all done but the playtesting."

If you don't think there's a difference, then that's on you. But for me the first would have probably been said at least a year ago and would have forced me to re-evaluate any 3.5 purchases I would have made over that time.

Exactly. Which is why it would've been pretty stupid for WotC to make an earlier announcement. It would have hurt their 3.5 sales.

 

[Dark Jezter]

Umbran already said it, but I think it just needs to be said again to anybody who is panicking because they think that all their 3.5 books are suddenly going to be useless next year:

You can still play 3.5 after 4e comes out. Nobody will be stopping you. You will still be able to keep using the thousands of dollars worth of gaming books you've built up over the last few years. I mean, hell, it's not the Gaming Police are going to kick down your door and arrest you if you're not playing the current edition.

The only way the game will change for you after 4e comes out is that 3.5e books will no longer be published.

 

[lin_fusan]

My 2 copper

I sometimes find these kinds of discussions slightly wonky mostly because everyone is correct to some level.

They way I see it, of course WotC is a business. It's their business to be a business. They've seen what makes money (and more importantly, they've seen what doesn't make money) and they will do what they can to make that money, which means another edition.

However, just because they are a business (and whether they are a smart business is another topic altogether) does not automatically mean they have my loyalty.

I'd like to think that I am a smart customer (or at least not a dumb one) and I'd like to get maximum enjoyment out of my dollar. I got a little frustrated when they went to 3.5 because I didn't want to shell out another $60 to $90 to play a game. Instead, I read and printed out their SRD, which I felt was a good compromise. I play 3.5 like WotC wants me to, but I've spent little-to-no money (barring paper and ink, but I view that as a business expense).

(The other reason I was annoyed at 3.5 was that I was doing some d20 gaming writing for Dragon and Dungeon, and I found myself having to delay my own projects just to get caught up on the "update.")

I've bought 1st edition games like Shadowrun and World of Darkness in my younger days, but quicky realized they really needed a new edition (or technically, better editing). After being "stung," I've held off buying the nWoD because I wanted to see how the game played now, and if I'd like it.

It's the same with a new console. I knew that Xbox 360 would have problems and that the PS3 would have problems in their first year, because previous consoles had problems in their first year.

Now I buy an RPG only if I know that I'll actually play it or if the story and artwork is so fantabulously stunning I'd enjoy just reading it.

In other words, you have to be a smart consumer for yourself. No one else will.