Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ThirdWizard" data-source="post: 3925656" data-attributes="member: 12037">The people who are trying to kill D&D are those who are posting on this forum with the intent of getting people not to buy 4e. People who aren't happy with the new edition aren't a problem; people who are upset at the direction D&D is taking aren't a problem, either. People who are trying to turn anti-4e into a movement, boycotting all 4e products because it is a new edition, and attempting to gather anyone they can into their circle are a problem. But, that is a extremely tiny minority of the anti-4e posters. Most people who are anti-4e are just expressing themselves on the internet in the normal way. Nothing out of the norm. Assume good intentions and things will go much more smoothly.As to the topic at hand, D&D needs new blood, that's for sure. The problem, I think, is the low entry rate of new gamers and the method of entry mostly being through current gamers. That means you have to have your current gamers, but you have to also have a game that appeals to a wide range of younger players. I don't envy WotC's position on this matter. It's pretty much lose-lose. If they want the game to be profitable in 20 years, they may have to give up some profits now. That might mean "firing" a lot of people, but it might be the best way to keep the niche from becoming even more nichey.The irony here is that the efforts of the design team is to keep the Tabletop gaming strong. I could easily see a future in 20 years where the D&D brand name is strong but not enough people want to buy D&D Tabletop products to keep it a viable product. WotC looks to be trying to nip this in the bud early. Now, lots of people might be saying they're going about it the wrong way, and that's fine. But, for the talk about video-gameizing D&D and all that, this is really what they're trying to avoid, and it would be nice if people gave them credit for that at least.</blockquote>

Verification