D&D 5E "5E is of no interest to me" - really? Already?

[DEFCON 1]

Even if the complaint is "i am taking my money and going home" that it is important and i doubt it will be overlooked this time around. From WOTC's pov what matters is the volume. If half the 4E players say they hate wizards now and wont buy their products that is a serious PR problem.

No... that's still completely useless. WotC IS MAKING 5E. It is happening. Even if half the people here on ENWorld said it was a bad idea... it wouldn't matter. You know why? Because we are the RPG's '1%'. We're the hardest of the hardcore and not actually indicative of the gaming public at large. So half of us saying 'don't make it' (especially if we gave no concrete reasons why they shouldn't make it) would not actually stop them from doing it.

And this is especially true considering that we're still a year and a half out at least, and what we say now is complete and utter crap. On both sides, positive and negative. We have 18 months to change our minds because it costs us nothing to do so. So WotC CAN'T take our claims at face value and instead have to look BENEATH THE SURFACE of our exclamations or complaints. And unless you actually talk about what you are and are not interested in... you don't have anything under the surface for them to get information from.

 

[Osgood]

Speaking as someone who played 5E and didn't like it much, even I can say I still have interest in it. I may not be convinced I'll switch when it gets released, but I'm still interested to see what they come up with. If for no other reason the intellectual curiosity about how WotC manages the whole process.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Not being close friends of any of the people involved, I'm only guessing. But from the outside looking in, a lot of this stuff looks like pure posturing, of the extreme, "squeeky wheel gets the grease--so watch while I pour some sand in my gears."

You know the guy that always complains to management about every little thing? I've only known two people that extreme (and happened to like both of them quite a bit despite it), but you do see some of the same thinking. One of those guys would argue with a manager at Sears for 30 mintues, to knock $1.50 off a $85.00 suitcase--because he can. They don't send their food back that one time the steak is charred, but any and every time their cut isn't perfect--because they can.

I once asked that suitcase guy why he went to that much trouble, all the time. He said that if he preemptively complained bitterly about everything, he got favors. He got free stuff. He got his way, even if other customers got inconvenienced. But he got his.

There is this subtle, nagging thought in a lot of heads that the only way to "get mine" out of a version of D&D is to do that kind of preemptive, bitter complaining. It's only a small step from that to thinking that it is necessary that other people not get what they want in order that resources be devoted to you. When half the time we all talk past each other or don't see the implications of what we want (or how we think we want it), you can get over that line without even trying.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

I'd have to say that it doesn't matter if there is useful information or not. WotC needs to know how much of the community is simply not interested regardless if there are design reasons or not. They need to know what they are up against, no matter if it is design related or marketing/PR related or completely irrational. Even in what might seem like an irrational statement, such as the one you offer which I had not seen, "I don't like it, and you can't make me." there is the implicit challenge that there is someone out there who would under some circumstances have been a customer. WotC needs to know they exist, what their numbers are, and to get them into the discussion so the reasons for those feelings are known, if WotC is going to have any chance of turning that position around (and they have said they want this edition to appeal to everyone). They can't convince someone who won't even communicate or, worse, are discouraged by diehard fans into keeping silent.

This is true up to a point. It stops being true when the person that doesn't like the current direction is, in effect, hindering discussion of everyone else:

Able: I don't like it!
Bert: Why?
Able: Because of X.
Bert: What about Y?
Cain: What about Z?
Bert: Yeah, Cain, we could blend those, and that might help Able.
Able: I don't like it!

That last line is totally useless. The signal to noise ratio is about to hit free fall.

 

[RoboCheney]

No... that's still completely useless. WotC IS MAKING 5E. It is happening. Even if half the people here on ENWorld said it was a bad idea... it wouldn't matter. You know why? Because we are the RPG's '1%'. We're the hardest of the hardcore and not actually indicative of the gaming public at large. So half of us saying 'don't make it' (especially if we gave no concrete reasons why they shouldn't make it) would not actually stop them from doing it.

This is getting nitpicky, but making that small group of hardcore fans happy is crucial. To be successful, a game (and this applies to board and video games too) needs those diehard fans to talk about a game, create buzz, and evangelize it to the masses--especially with the growing role of social media. For D&D, those fans help keep organized gaming events alive, run games at the FLGS, recruit new players at sites like this, subscribe to D&DI, and probably buy most of if not the entire product line.

I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of WotC's revenue comes from only 10% of the player base.

Given 5e's goal as the unifying edition, if its clear a lot of the diehards don't want it, then there's a big problem even without more information to go by.

 

[Bedrockgames]

No... that's still completely useless. WotC IS MAKING 5E. It is happening. Even if half the people here on ENWorld said it was a bad idea... it wouldn't matter. You know why? Because we are the RPG's '1%'. We're the hardest of the hardcore and not actually indicative of the gaming public at large. So half of us saying 'don't make it' (especially if we gave no concrete reasons why they shouldn't make it) would not actually stop them from doing it.

And this is especially true considering that we're still a year and a half out at least, and what we say now is complete and utter crap. On both sides, positive and negative. We have 18 months to change our minds because it costs us nothing to do so. So WotC CAN'T take our claims at face value and instead have to look BENEATH THE SURFACE of our exclamations or complaints. And unless you actually talk about what you are and are not interested in... you don't have anything under the surface for them to get information from.

I never said it would stop 5e but if half of current 4e players said they were not buying wotc products anymore becuase of the release, I am convinced WOTC would take note and factor that into future decisions. Like I said it is useful information for WOTC to have. As I stated volume and numbers are important here. WOTC will be looking at how different people react (positive and negative). This whole problem started because they ignored these sort of complaints when 4e was coming out. The base was split and WOTC lost customers. They clearly want to regain those lapsed customers while retaining as many current customers as possible. i just cant see how these sorts of complaints wouldn't be useful to them.

 

[billd91]

This is true up to a point. It stops being true when the person that doesn't like the current direction is, in effect, hindering discussion of everyone else:

Able: I don't like it!
Bert: Why?
Able: Because of X.
Bert: What about Y?
Cain: What about Z?
Bert: Yeah, Cain, we could blend those, and that might help Able.
Able: I don't like it!

That last line is totally useless. The signal to noise ratio is about to hit free fall.

That last line may not be helpful, but that second line of Abel's should have been sufficient. If X was the deal breaker for Able, Bert and Cain probably won't be able to sway him by distracting him with Y and Z.

 

[Mark CMG]

This is true up to a point. It stops being true when the person that doesn't like the current direction is, in effect, hindering discussion of everyone else:

Able: I don't like it!
Bert: Why?
Able: Because of X.
Bert: What about Y?
Cain: What about Z?
Bert: Yeah, Cain, we could blend those, and that might help Able.
Able: I don't like it!

That last line is totally useless. The signal to noise ratio is about to hit free fall.

Bert asks Able "Why?" and then suggested something Able didn't find satisfactory. That prevents no one from further discussion and deepens WotC's understanding of what it would take to overcome Able's objection.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

That last line may not be helpful, but that second line of Abel's should have been sufficient. If X was the deal breaker for Able, Bert and Cain probably won't be able to sway him by distracting him with Y and Z.

Well, I'm sure that is how Abel reads it. That's part of the problem (as in, "thing that is difficult to handle", not "bad Abel!"). However, Bert and Cain are seriously looking for a solution for Abel that does not amount to "cave in to your surface demands and ignore the needs of everyone else." So they start looking. Y and Z aren't distractions, but part and parcel of the whole thing, which if they can be discussed, might make everyone happy.

Up until that last line, there has been no problem out of anyone, though potentially of course misunderstanding all around. Perhaps Y and Z are totally incapable of satisfying Abel. Abel is registering his disapproval and why, Bert and Cain are looking for solutions. It's all good.

But then Abel refuses to engage. Need I continue this discussion the way it usually goes--post after post of continued participation but refusal to engage with any ideas presented, passive aggressive sniping at the ideas, edition warring? X is a deal-breaker for Abel, and he is absolutely disinterested in any discussion about it. So anything further he has to say with that mindset is not merely useless, but actively counter-productive. It provides no new information to WotC. It interferes with everyone else looking for a solution--possibly one that Abel might even like if he'd consider it. And eventually, if this keeps up long enough over multiple topics, no matter how they started the conversation, Bert and Cain are pretty well convinced that "wants X" is short-hand for "completely close-minded". At that point, they stop caring whether X is even worth considering--unless someone more reasonable than Abel that shares his preferences is engaged.

Now assume that Bert and Cain happen to work for WotC, or perhaps happen to be insightful playtesters that WotC have found highly useful. I don't see how this situation helps Abel at all, if he really wants what he said he wants.

 

[Incenjucar]

At least for me, it's not that I'm not interested; I'm looking forward to the playtest and I've had some great design discussions as a result.

The problem is I'm unimpressed with the tidbits I have seen; a lot of the apparent design decisions run counter to what I want out of a system. I'm expressing that I dislike that, but not preemptively dismissing the system. In the end, the playtest is probably what'll make or break the game for me. The sooner they open that up, the better.

This is how it is for me.

Up until the L&L articles started, I was vocally comfortable with a new edition, despite being quite in love with 4E. As the L&L articles started rolling out, I became increasingly uncomfortable about where the people in charge thought the game should go. Later, 5E was announced, and they stopped masking their intentions, but almost every article has made me less and less confident in the value of 5E. However, despite my reservations, I will still give the edition a fair chance, and I will use this opportunity they have given us to voice my opinions and preferences of where I think the game should go.

5E may be something I greatly enjoy, or it may be something I cannot at all enjoy, and more likely somewhere in between. I can't judge it until it's actually here. But little that has been said about it has given me a reason to expect anything positive.