Changeover Poll

[Edena_of_Neith]

D&D failing in the marketplace is not fantastic news for gamers of any stripe, competitors or not.

I wish simply to say that I am in profound agreement with you.

Edena_of_Neith

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

I wish to venture an opinion.

It should never be a case of 4E or 3E or 2E or 1E or OD&D. Or C&D. Or Pathfinder. Or (put your game of choice here.)

It should never be a choice of playing 4E FR or 3E FR or 2E FR or 1E FR.
It should never be a choice of playing DL or AQ or BR or SL or RS or GH or LM or MY or SJ or PS or DS.
It should never be a choice of playing Kalamar or Eberron.
It should never be this *or* that.

It should be a case of this *AND* that, that AND that, that AND the other, that AND yet another.

I think most of the people at WOTC believe in *this and that* , whether those working there now, or those from Way Back Then.

I think most people at ENWorld and the other boards, also believe in *this and that.*

The Changeover Poll presumes a *this OR that* only scenario. I do not believe in or want this scenario. I do not believe in the precepts of my own poll.

Unfortunately ... the *this or that* scenario seems to have occurred, in spite of the fact that none of us want it. So, we have polls like this one. My apologies, folks.

Yours Sincerely
Edena_of_Neith

 

[Jasperak]

The Changeover Poll presumes a *this OR that* only scenario. I do not believe in or want this scenario. I do not believe in the precepts of my own poll.

Unfortunately ... the *this or that* scenario seems to have occurred, in spite of the fact that none of us want it. So, we have polls like this one. My apologies, folks.

Yours Sincerely
Edena_of_Neith

Are your beliefs about the poll because it shows for the small amount that have responded that 590/709 are part of that either-or group.

I don't want 4e to fail (and I cannot imagine that it would even come close to failing) but in my extremely limited experience with it and players that prefer it over 3e, I much prefer they play in their game and I will continue to play in mine (which happens to be 1e/2e and may make a transition to Warhammer Fantasy.) I seem to have more in common in play style with pre-4e players than 4e. 4e caters to a different play style and that is ok.

 

[kitsune9]

My group went with Pathfinder. Never tried 4e though I own the books though my players have played in session or two of 4e with other gaming groups. I only have time for one gaming group thus the reason for not getting around to 4e.

 

[Samuel Leming]

It should be a case of this *AND* that, that AND that, that AND the other, that AND yet another.

That would be nice, but I've only time for one RPG session per week.

Sam

 

[Darkwolf71]

Personally, I don't think we should have been, but I do think the game can succeed on the basis of new blood. 4Ed Core is outselling previous editions. At the very least, that's an indicator that it should do at least as well as the next most successful games other than 3.5 out there- your HERO, GURPS, WoD and the like.

The potential problem with focusing so much on the 'new target' audience is that the members of that audience may move on to 'the next big thing' quickly. How many of the guys & gals we gamed with years ago are still playing? I can't answer that question since I am not currently in contact with any of my high school gamer friends. The one whom I did recently chat with briefly no longer games at all. Of the 9 people I game with currently, only 2 besides myself have been at it for more than 5 years.

So, if the old guard has chosen not to move to the new game, will the newer, younger generation that is often stereotyped for it's short attention span stay with it? Maybe they will. Maybe the gamble will pay off and 4e will be the WoW of tabletop RPGs. (I use the comparison only in terms of success, so put down the torches.) Or it could turn out to be more like Vanguard, look good as hell out of the gate, but ultimately bomb. And of course there is plenty of room between the two extremes.

 

[Treebore]

The only bad thing about this poll, and it still does not make it unusable, but does prevent a direct comparison to the one done 6 months ago, is how many of the voters voting this time voted last time.

Even though direct comparison to the last poll is not validly possible, this is still shaping up to be a rather negative picture for WOTC.

Which I don't like, because I do believe the RPG hobby does need a solid flagship to keep the hobby moving forward. This polls is shaping up to say WOTC made a huge misstep. Like others have been mentioning, that probably is not a good thing for our hobby.

I doubt the next 300 voters will be almost exclusively for 4E, and even if they do end up going that way, it would still say that 4E hasn't gained any ground in the RPG community in the last 6 months. Still not good, but at least it wouldn't be as bad as losing ground.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

I think most of the people at WOTC believe in *this and that* , whether those working there now, or those from Way Back Then.

That's a nice thought, and it ultimately might even be true.

But it's not how 4E was marketed. 4E was marketed by direct comparison to 3E, with 3E in a negative light. Some people argue that the designers weren't saying, "Look how much Third Edition sucks," and we can disagree on whether they were saying that or not, but the designers were absolutely not saying "4E and 3E."

You didn't create "this or that." IMO, it was inevitable, but it literally started with 4E's designers. And I'm not saying that as an accusation. If you're selling a new product, you don't say, "Look, the old product is still great." I'm just pointing out that "this or that" was, as I said, inevitable.

 

[Hawklord]

All 3 DMs in our grouip took a look at 4e and had the same response "no thanks!" so we'll be sticking with 3e.

AS far as the poll I think its intersting. If such a high proportion of hard-core gamers (and thus purchasers) have turned away from 4e it could mean they have made a serious misstep. I know I pretty much bought everything that WOTC put out for 3/3.5 but they haveny had a penny of mine since 4e came out. - statistically irrelevant or not.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

That 4E has fractured the old guard is still disputed, but it seems very clear to me that this fracture is real and significant. I think this is a serious miscalculation on WoTC's part but they clearly expected some loss of the old-timers, though perhaps not to the degree they have got now.

I think with hindsight, this ignoring the old guard will rank as one of the stupidest mistakes WoTC have ever made with respect to D&D; especially when Ryan Dancey once pointed out that the only effective competitor that D&D would ever have to reckon with was a previous edition of the game.

I'm skeptical. I think just having the moniker "D&D" branded on it will ensure sales for the first year or two at least. I think tossing out power creeping splatbooks left and right will hold sales steady after that. I think that 4E cannot "fail." Either it survives for 8+ years (obviously good), or craps out after a few, which in turn means that a new edition of the game will be "needed." Whichever happens, WotC will do just fine.

The size of the "grognard" section of gamers is stagnant, WotC may be hurt without the majority of them, but it's hardly a death blow. If they do attract lots of new people, it will offset the loss. The last part about competing with previous editions is pretty spot on, though. If there were to be a major factor in 4E under-performing, it will be not because of the business decisions or even the game system they put out recently, but because of the much less restrictive gaming license and quality product they put out previously. I know I'd be much more amenable to 4E if 3E/OGL didn't exist.