Coming to a MM near you- FLAVOR!

I love 4e. I took the survey. I want more fluff. I don't think that the mm1 and mm2 were ruined for it's lack, but I do want more of it in mm3.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

But I think the loudest complaints come from those who don't play or are otherwise unhappy in general with the game. Not those who love it, but don't like x or y.

I will bet a tooth that a hefty number of those who took said survey don't currently play 4e.

Finding out from people who aren't playing your game precisely why they aren't playing your game so you can improve it and possibly expand your base of customers is rather important, especially in a highly fragmented market.
 

Finding out from people who aren't playing your game precisely why they aren't playing your game so you can improve it and possibly expand your base of customers is rather important, especially in a highly fragmented market.

If you have 90% market share, I doubt you care just how fragmented the remaining 10% is.
 

If you have 90% market share, I doubt you care just how fragmented the remaining 10% is.
This. When "improving" the game to capture a small segment of customers would cause a much larger segment of current customers to lose interest, it's not really improvement at all.

When you have such a huge chunk of the market, you want to avoid any changes that might jeopardize that market share. Any change you make to product lines is going to be a gamble that threatens to lose you customers you already had. The best way to expand is not by altering the core of your product, but rather to repackage or remarket your product in a way that makes it appealing to people who are not already part of the current market. WotC is doing that this next year, by releasing repackaged material designed to appeal to new players and new DMs.

Altering the MMs to contain more fluff and fewer stat blocks is a gamble, so hopefully they're confident enough that the people who have been buying the earlier MMs will continue to purchase the fluff-heavy ones.
 

Except that there's no winning some detractors. For instance, Fluff in the MM is not going to make anyone not play 4e.

There's a difference between Constructive criticism feedback and "Oh my god I hate everything about it". And again, I think that the latter are who's going to be generating the most negative feedback.
 

I think I'd find a single-line explanation of a listed encounter group very helpful. If I can't explain it to myself I can't use it, so this would definitely be handy.
 

Except that there's no winning some detractors. For instance, Fluff in the MM is not going to make anyone not play 4e.

There's a difference between Constructive criticism feedback and "Oh my god I hate everything about it". And again, I think that the latter are who's going to be generating the most negative feedback.
I believe the decision to add fluff was based (at least partially) on an online survey a few months back that first asked a number of questions to gauge your overall interest and investment in 4e (including previous MMs). Presumably, they'd be paying a lot of attention to the differences between what current customers were saying, and detractors were saying.
 

I thought the MMs had a lot of flavour in them.

The only thing I would like to see is # appearing, basically. How many goblins make up a goblin lair? I'm making these numbers up myself, based on some old school tables.
 

Well, I'm quite happy with the way the current MM's are laid out, but have no problem with them trying something new. It's all good to me, as long as the ideas keep flowing.
 

This is a step in the right direction. Especially as they move from the monsters "everyone knows" such as orcs and dragons, there will be more of a need to explain what the various monsters are.

Of course, a lot will depend on quality: bad fluff is worse than no fluff at all, as it takes up space that could have been better used.

It's purely an self-central view thing. If it's not useful TO ME, then it's a waste (for me). I want what I WANT. I don't CARE what other people want. ME ME ME ME ME. I am paying my money for less.

By that logic, 4e is an unmitigated failure, because it doesn't cater to me. WotC cannot design books just for you, or for me. They have to try to design the books that the majority of the customer base want. And if the majority of their feedback suggests that people want more fluff, then that's what they should do (or at least try).

And, frankly, the lack of fluff in the 4e MM is awful (IMO). Coupled with the amount of whitespace and the large font size, it is almost inexcusable - they had all that space available, and decided to waste it instead of providing (potentially new) DMs with information that they could use to bring life to their monsters? It's probably the biggest mistake they made in putting together 4e.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top