4e/WotC: Pro- or Anti- why do you care?

[Azgulor]

Some interesting observations, here.

I'm kind of surprised 5e wishful thinking might already be driving a lot of the discussion. I generally view edition changes as a pain in the ass.

Apparently I'm in the minority, but I also don't give a fig about the D&D brand. It's rpg experience of creating campaigns, adventures, & NPCs and then seeing the stories unfold with my friends that matters. Perhaps that's b/c I abandoned D&D for a long stretch in the 2e and early 3e days. The brand is inconsequential aside from potentially making it easier to recruit players.

I mean, I love first-person-shooter video games. However, while I might anticipate a sequel or new release, I don't have an issue expressing disappointment if an installment doesn't cut it. Same thing for movies. So the idea that someone approaches RPGs from a perspective of "I don't really like X Edition, but I'm loyal to the D&D brand" seems, well, ludicrous. YMMV.

 

[Shemeska]

Short answer?

5E


Those who like 4e want 5e to continue in that direction that 4e went.

Those who don't like 4e want 5e to roll back the changes made and return D&D to a more familiar game they have been playing for years, unslaughter the sacred cows.

Doubleplusunslaughter them!

During 3.x there were a number of things that I didn't like, and which I posted in various places over the years on the WotC boards as what I hoped would happen in some putative 4e. Unfortunately the things I listed as dislikes were almost uniformly the things that 4e -rather than remove or play down- put on steroids and pushed front and center, while the things that I did like were in many cases excised, ground into hamburger, or declared as having been given a bullet to the head.

I had wishes for what 4e could have been, and it went in the exact opposite direction. I could hope that a 5e might reverse course, but I doubt they will. Plus, the market that they might hope to regain in the process may have already moved on to another edition that while called Pathfinder/3.P and not called 4e, captures much more of what I'd hoped for in a WotC 4e that never transpired.

 

[DumbPaladin]

This is usually how a thread starts its spiral into flames. Someone assigns the feelings they have to the attitude of others. I haven't seen any support for saying that WotC or other ENWorld posters who are pro-WotC have made it clear that anti-WotC/anti-4E people are either undesired, unimportant, or irrelevant. What I have seen is WotC making strives to change the game in ways that might appeal to lapsed players and starting an organized Encounters program to make it easier for long-time lapsed players to find a venue of play inside their busy schedule of work, family, and life in general. What I have seen is other pro-WotC ENWorlders say that you can't please everyone and with every new edition there is the risk of some people choosing not to play the new edition. This is not the same as saying such players are undesired, unimportant, or irrelevant.

I'm not at all suggesting ENworld people are in any way part of the situation. WotC is very much interested in targeting a new group of gamer; they've said this in different ways quite a few times now, and I'd really hate to dig up quotes because I'm sure other people have them at their fingertips. That was a corporate decision. I've no idea whether it was the right one or not, but since I'm not part of this "new group", I am left to wonder exactly what sort of message that sends people like me. So yes, in my opinion, I'd have to say I felt one of those three things.

In going after a new group ... you could suggest that the current or "old" group of fans are considered a vital part of the franchise, or you could just be happy to move on. I think the decision was made to simply move on and view the disenfrenchised fan base as "acceptable losses" -- the decision to not publish both 3.5 material along with 4E suggests that.

If you read what I said, I'm not at all sure how WotC viewed the current fanbase in making their decision to move away from a large portion of them (hence my guesses), but if they viewed it in a positive way ... well, then why the change?

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

WotC is very much interested in targeting a new group of gamer; they've said this in different ways quite a few times now, and I'd really hate to dig up quotes because I'm sure other people have them at their fingertips.

Yes, but targeting new gamers does not mean that WotC believes its older fanbase to be undesired, unimportant, or irrelevant. And attempts to locate quotes to the latter effect typically turn up nothing but one's own perceptions on how they viewed the message.

That was a corporate decision. I've no idea whether it was the right one or not, but since I'm not part of this "new group", I am left to wonder exactly what sort of message that sends people like me. So yes, in my opinion, I'd have to say I felt one of those three things.

I'm not saying you don't feel or shouldn't feel undesired, unimportant, or irrelevant. But that is not something WotC has set out to do. At best you and others are infering such from their statements. Inference can lead to the same problems as assuming.

In going after a new group ... you could suggest that the current or "old" group of fans are considered a vital part of the franchise, or you could just be happy to move on. I think the decision was made to simply move on and view the disenfrenchised fan base as "acceptable losses" -- the decision to not publish both 3.5 material along with 4E suggests that.

And I don't believe this to be true. They seemed to try to earnestly address issues people were having with the game. They seemed to honestly try to keep the general concept of the game the same while moving into new areas. Asking a company to split its focus and produce two games at once is unrealistic and is by no means a sign that they were leaving anyone behind. I believe they tried their best to make an evocative new edition that players would move to. The fact that you and others did not is no clear sign that they intentionally set out to leave you behind as an acceptable loss. But once you made your decision, what are they to do? Stop their momentum and move backwards (not meaning that 3E is backwards in terms of quality, just in time)? That very well could have been the deathknell of both editions for WotC (other smaller companies like Paizo may have been able to keep going as they are now).

If you read what I said, I'm not at all sure how WotC viewed the current fanbase in making their decision to move away from a large portion of them (hence my guesses), but if they viewed it in a positive way ... well, then why the change?

From what I've read they had phases in mind since the start. The first was bold revisions to the game that would satisfy common problems people had with 3E and bring in players from outside the TTRPG world. The second phase was to bring back players that had lapsed for a long time due to life circumstances. The third seems to be attracting the retro group and simplfying the rules for additional new players. Yes, they still hope to bring you back into the fold. No one's decisions are necessarily permanent. I saw many people posit that there is nothing WotC could do to bring them back. And only gaming extremists could make such an absolute statement. Although the fact that we're here on ENWorld makes us more hardcore fans than the average player. It also makes us very unrepresentive of the community as a whole.

 

[innerdude]

The only reason I care at all is that like it or not, the Dungeons & Dragons brand carries more clout in the RPG market than any other entity, and when the market leader is producing a product I don't particularly like or want to play, it affects my opportunities to meaningfully participate in an RPG experience I would like to have.

Market clout means Wizards has more influence on the direction, appeal, appearance, and overall "persona" of the pen-and-paper RPG market, and if all of the "new generation" of gamers are weaned on a game I don't like, it can affect my ability to find and participate in games that I feel will be the best RPG experience for me.

 

[Azgulor]

The only reason I care at all is that like it or not, the Dungeons & Dragons brand carries more clout in the RPG market than any other entity, and when the market leader is producing a product I don't particularly like or want to play, it affects my opportunities to meaningfully participate in an RPG experience I would like to have.

Market clout means Wizards has more influence on the direction, appeal, appearance, and overall "persona" of the pen-and-paper RPG market, and if all of the "new generation" of gamers are weaned on a game I don't like, it can affect my ability to find and participate in games that I feel will be the best RPG experience for me.

Agreed. If 5e was on the near-term horizon (and I don't think it is unless I missed an announcement somewhere), trying to influence the direction of the game or the publisher would be completely understandable. I tried it with WotC/4e (lost) and Paizo/PF (won). Once the decision was made and my RPG selection was made, it seemed rather pointless to argue the merits or flaws of 4e. I no longer cared. I was no longer a WotC customer or a D&D GM/player.

So for me, lacking a new edition on the horizon, it seems utterly pointless to approach other gamers and say "I know you tried 4e (or insert RPG X here) and didn't like it. It's 6 mos. later, nothing's changed, no new edition is announced, and a product catalog gives us an idea what to expect for the next year. That aside, on the remote chance WotC (or insert publisher Y here) is interested in scrapping their business plan, what would they have to change to bring you back to the current edition?"

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

nothing's changed[/I]

I think this is where people will disagree with you most. There are many threads full of worried 4E players in the 4E forum that hope the changes being made to the game with Essentials don't change the game too much.

Then you have people that were unhappy at the outset of 4E because there was no gnome, druid, barbarian, monk, fill in the blnak with your other favorite missing element, etc. Many of the elements are now in the game.

And 4E is the most malleable edition to date. New concepts fit in well because of the modular exception-based design. Things have changed since its inception and it seems valid to ask the question. If you don't like the question, don't read the thread. Easy enough.

 

[GregChristopher]

Although the fact that we're here on ENWorld makes us more hardcore fans than the average player. It also makes us very unrepresentive of the community as a whole.

Or we could be the tip of the iceberg, saying things that the silent majority believes but doesnt care enough to say.

 

[amerigoV]

However, let's face it, the Edition Wars are over.

What?!?!?!

Azgulor - War's over, man. WOTC dropped the big one.

AmerigoV: Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!

Otter: Germans?

Boon: Forget it, he's rolling.

AmerigoV: And it ain't over now. 'Cause when the goin' gets tough...
[thinks hard]

AmerigoV: the tough get goin'! Who's with me? Let's go!
[runs out, alone; then returns]

AmerigoV: What the #$%^&* happened to the ENWorld I used to know? Where's the spirit? Where's the guts, huh? This could be the greatest night of our lives, but you're gonna let it be the worst. "Ooh, we're afraid to go with you AmerigoV, we might get in trouble." Well just kiss my tuckus from now on! Not me! I'm not gonna take this. WOTC, dead! 4e, dead! DDI...



Personally, I do not care. I just like to watch people chuck spears at each other. I'll play any version of D&D, but I'll only GM Savage Worlds.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Frankly, I care mostly because WotC introduced a good thing with the OGL, then backed away from their own advance. It was very frustrating to watch. Did they have the right to do so? Yes. Do I have the right to say 'goodbye WotC'? Also yes. Had they kept the OGL for their game I would likely still have not jumped to the new edition, but my annoyance would have been greatly lessened. I will likely never enjoy 4e - just not my game, eh? But the part that annoyed me was the poorly handled switch over.

Mind you, Paizo then picked up the ball and ran with it. The ball was back in play and the game went on. With Paizo picking up the OGL version of the game a good deal of my annoyance with WotC was put on the shelf. Not gone, but now just gathering dust. The OGL is back on the table, new things are coming out for it, if not at the levels seen under the 'D20 Glut'.*

I am more concerned with seeing the OGL license continue than I am about whether 4e is a good game. In fact, it may be fine as a game, just a bit too gamist for my own tastes.

But with the OGL seeing regular support again, I can live with that.

The Auld Grump, ha ha! Fooled you! The whole purpose of this post was to test my new keyboard!**

* To be honest, I enjoyed the days of the D20 Glut - it reminded me of the very early days, back when three guys who had access to a mimeograph machine could create and sell their own game. And I liked a lot of the amateur efforts that might otherwise never seen the light of day.

** It is possible that the above statement about keyboards is an exaggeration, stretching of the truth, or outright falsehood. Except the part about having a new keyboard. So far, I am very much liking this keyboard.