Changeover Poll

[Slander]

Still playing 3.5, haven't tried 4E yet (though I've read it). Nothing specific against 4E. We started the WotBS campaign a couple months before 4E came out, we're only midway through the third adventure, and we likely won't even talk about converting until we finish the campaign (one way or the other).

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

We now have 200 votes in the new poll. As of the 200 vote mark:

Changeover: 27%
No Changeover: 60%
Partial Changeover: 13%

 

[Dragonblade]

Therin lies the trick.

If the latter 2 poll categories continue to grow, then there are likely fewer and fewer gamers within WotC's 4Ed market, which could lead to declines in sales.

Well, I find the poll results interesting because literally the only people I know of that still play 3.5 are people I know from EN World.

None of the local gamers I know still plays 3.5. That not only includes my immediate group which is 9 people (none of whom read EN World), but also the people I know from hanging out at the FLGS who all have their own groups that play 4e. All told, thats around 30 some people, probably more. All 4e only with zero interest of going back to 3.5. And we talk about this stuff all the time.

Heck, my FLGS doesn't even stock 3.5 books or Pathfinder stuff anymore outside of a token copy of the latest release. The owners will order it for you if you want it, but it doesn't seem to sell well. But that could also be because all the Paizo diehards all buy based off subscription or internet sales direct from Paizo.

Anyway, I think EN World's audience seems to skew heavily towards 3.5 and Pathfinder fans. The poll results don't mesh at all with the reality I see offline.

 

[Gothmog]

Pretty much all 4e, all the time here in the three groups I'm in. Two groups swore off 3.x forever, and the other group plays 4e on a rotating schedule with Spycraft and Savage Worlds Deadlands game.

Although earlier this year I got back together for a weekend of gaming with a group I was in during college, and we played about 20 hours of AD&D 2e- great times!

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

To Dragonblade:

I could not tell you whether ENWorld is skewed towards 3rd edition or earlier editions of D&D/AD&D (or Pathfinder - I am receiving the impression that many think of Pathfinder as an Edition of D&D ... whether that is true or not, is up to them to decide, not myself) is not something within my knowledge.
Frankly, I do not know at all what the disposition on ENWorld leans towards. I would not know even if I had posted more often. Morrus would know, and other Admins, but not myself.

All I can do is take polls, and be curious about the results.

You'll have to ask Morrus and the Admins here, what the sentiment is. I do not know.

Yours Sincerely
Edena_of_Neith

 

[Jack99]

4e all the way.

 

[Gothmog]

Well, I find the poll results interesting because literally the only people I know of that still play 3.5 are people I know from EN World.

None of the local gamers I know still plays 3.5. That not only includes my immediate group which is 9 people (none of whom read EN World), but also the people I know from hanging out at the FLGS who all have their own groups that play 4e. All told, thats around 30 some people, probably more. All 4e only with zero interest of going back to 3.5. And we talk about this stuff all the time.

Heck, my FLGS doesn't even stock 3.5 books or Pathfinder stuff anymore outside of a token copy of the latest release. The owners will order it for you if you want it, but it doesn't seem to sell well. But that could also be because all the Paizo diehards all buy based off subscription or internet sales direct from Paizo.

Anyway, I think EN World's audience seems to skew heavily towards 3.5 and Pathfinder fans. The poll results don't mesh at all with the reality I see offline.

Your experiences mirror my own, and for two FLGSs in Springfield and Columbia MO. 4e books sell like crazy, and requests from customers for 3.5/compatible stuff has dropped to nearly nothing. I talk to quite a few of the guys who frequent my FLGS, and only one die hard group of five guys still plays 3.5/Pathfinder out of about 50 guys I know (and few, if any of them read ENWorld or any RPG forums online). We debate and talk about 4e stuff all the time, swap house rules, ideas, plots, etc- so I have a pretty good feel for what folks around here are playing.

My FLGS gets one copy in of whatever new Pathfinder thing comes out (barring the Adventure Paths, which they get 5 of), and while they will special order anything you want, my understanding is that apart from a few internet-saavy gamers (which isn't that many), the PF stuff mostly sits on shelves for months until it gets dropped onto the bargain shelves. For all intents and purposes, 3.x/Pathfinder is completely off the radar of 90% of the gaming public.

What I can tell you is that the demographic seems to have changed from 3.x to 4e, according to the owner of my FLGS. Around here, 3.x was bought mostly by older males (25+). 4e has a much higher proportion of women and kids buying it than did 3.x, as well as gamers who lapsed and are coming back. I do know the D&D Delve Night for January (part of which I'm running) is booked solid, but during 3.x's reign similar events had virtually no attendance. Make of that what you will.

 

[Echohawk]

Well, I find the poll results interesting because literally the only people I know of that still play 3.5 are people I know from EN World. [...] Anyway, I think EN World's audience seems to skew heavily towards 3.5 and Pathfinder fans. The poll results don't mesh at all with the reality I see offline.

It seems reasonable that folks who visit ENWorld, and particularly those who post and respond to polls, are likely to be more serious about D&D (and RPGs in general) than more casual gamers. From that, I don't think it is too much of a leap to guess that folks here are probably also more invested (financially and emotionally) in 3ed than the average gamer. So I'd be surprised if the boards did not reflect more of a bias towards older editions of the game than the "average" gamer.

I mentioned up thread that I'm in the 50/50 category. I have one long-running 3.5 campaign, which would be too jarring to migrate to 4e, and I've also been running Keep on the Shadowfell for another group. For me, the most troubling aspect of the edition change has been running both 3.5e and 4e campaigns at the same time. I find that I tend to confuse some of the minor differences in both games (what triggers attacks of opportunity, or counting diagonal movement, for example). I'm an experienced DM and usually notice my mistakes before the players do, so I don't think this is having much impact on the game for them. But I'm still finding it surprisingly annoying not to be able to focus on just one version of the rules. It is as if I can't quite immerse myself in the 4e system while I still need to keep 3.5e stored in my brain.

I would not try to straddle two editions again. When we get to 5th edition, I'll wrap up any 4e campaigns first and only then start using the new rule system.

 

[Echohawk]

What I can tell you is that the demographic seems to have changed from 3.x to 4e, according to the owner of my FLGS. Around here, 3.x was bought mostly by older males (25+). 4e has a much higher proportion of women and kids buying it than did 3.x, as well as gamers who lapsed and are coming back.

If your local demographics are any indication of the general trend, and 4e is indeed getting more women and kids into the hobby, I think that is very good news for gamers, no matter which edition or RPG system is your personal preference!

 

[Treebore]

The misconception is that a tiny geographical area like one city would represent the rest of the country. The reality of this poll is that it is nationwide, and to a point, world wide. IF this poll gets 1,000 responses it will be as viable as the polls you saw on CNN and FOX about who would lead the US next.

When you take statistical data there are formula's you can apply to it to increase its accuracy by accounting for possible confounds. You have to be careful though, because you can literally make statistical data say pretty much whatever you wish it to say.

So if this poll was to be analyzed and have the appropriate formula's applied it would be accurate enough to be meaningful.

Who knows, maybe I'll get motivated to pull out my old books and look up some good engines and compile this into a useful set of data.

Even without accounting for confounds it will be generally accurate, however bean counters would be much more interested in data with an accuracy of +/-3% or better.