Could this be the future format of 4th Edition D&D?

[Mark Hope]

...and thats anymore limiting that waiting for Oriental Adventures, Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting, Manual of the Planes, Epic Level Handbook etc.

...

...and thats anymore limiting than releasing Psionics Handbook, Draconomicon, Hordes of the Abyss, Forge of Fury, Dungeon Magazine...whats the incentive to buy those...

The issue here is not 3.5. The issue is the model that you have described and how ir stands on its own merits (which you are avoiding here). However, none of those supplements that you mention above are required for 3.5. The add-ons in your model are required (at least, that is how you have described them). That is why your model is limiting.

Why buy anything when you can make it yourself? The first and most obvious reason is convenience. The second reason is quality. The third reason is variety. The fourth reason is collectibility (of miniatures in particular).

None of which are unique to your model. So I ask again - what does your model offer that I don't already have?

How is it then fundamentally flawed?

In the ways that I have described above and in earlier posts.

I fail to see how my format is that much more limited, especially when contrasted against 3 core rulebooks, which in terms of pricing is 2-3 boxed sets.

OK, then you fail to see that. Not my problem - it's your model after all, not mine. You have yet to show what your model offers that the current system doesn't. Despite your claims to the contrary, 3.5 can be stripped back in complexity without sacrificing balance. Your model offers nothing new. And its modular nature requires the DM either to sacrifice flexibility or design things himself, thus failing to progress beyond the current situation with 3.5 in any way whatsoever. Sorry. No sale here.

 

[crazy_cat]

*snip*If 3.5 was all that and a bag of potato chips where is the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting 3.5?

It was called Players Guide to Faerun - and it updated the material in the FRCS 3.0 to 3.5 without invalidating it. Book owners didn't need to throw their old book away, and WOTC got more sales.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey UK!

Howdy Nifft dude!

Haven't the Complete series been selling pretty well? Better even than the thin softcovers they replaced?

How much of that was regurgitated and how much was new material though. Also remember that the Complete series brought the early splat books into colour.

However, that aside, I don't know how well those early 'Complete' books have sold.

In any case, as a family of products -- each bit extensible with the others -- I could see it being a serious success, and needing a reboot which would involve selling new Core books, new expansions, and new accessories.

New technologies will also help -- you can't currently sell a module which centers around a holoprojection map, because there is no such thing. I expect on-line modules to become possible, then marketable, and finally profitable.

Yes but you are not suggesting the abandonment of tabletop gaming in favour of online gaming are you?

So the question becomes what shape is the tabletop game going to take.

Anyway, as a family of products, there could be several "core"s. One core would be the P&P RPG rule set. Another would be the minis game. Another would be ... a card game? I could see high-level mage battles being modeled well by some kind of a card game.

Is that too divisory though I wonder?

I mean why would Wizards want to make a D&D card game when they have Magic the Gathering. That sector is already covered.

You could always have a Miniatures game that was Skirmish/Army based, but again thats a different product to what I am suggesting.

I can't see how exactly... but that's why I still work for a living.

 

[Mark Hope]

Hi Mark!

Hey

Well its obviously opinion based on common sense. But at the same time people are quick to illustrate its just my opinion without actually tackling the point I am making.

What would you say your point is? That the only way 4e is viable is under the model that you describe? That's what I hear you saying - if it's something else, you need to clarify it. Either way, that has nothing to do with your own (erroneous imho) opinions on the sales of 3.5. Any statements about 3.5 sales should be backed up with facts - or discarded for the unfounded opinion that they are.

What is the incentive for a 4th Edition pen & paper beyond perhaps the core rulebooks?

Heh. From my perspective? None. I am quite happy with what I've got, thanks. I just don't like your model either. The continued survival of the D&D brand is of no interest or concern to me whatsoever.

History shows us that when they brought out 3.5 they didn't re-release all the 3rd Edition books in the new format!

Because they didn't need to. The Update Booklet and new entries in the DMG/MM covered the necessary ground. Those areas that could be remarketed were. This has nothing to do with 3.5 viability. It has to do with the stability of the existing rules. You are conflating the two.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey crazy_cat?

It was called Players Guide to Faerun - and it updated the material in the FRCS 3.0 to 3.5 without invalidating it. Book owners didn't need to throw their old book away, and WOTC got more sales.

What updated material from the Campaign Setting Book does it have?.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey

Howdy!

What would you say your point is? That the only way 4e is viable is under the model that you describe?

Until someone comes up with a better idea, so far I haven't heard it.

That's what I hear you saying - if it's something else, you need to clarify it. Either way, that has nothing to do with your own (erroneous imho) opinions on the sales of 3.5. Any statements about 3.5 sales should be backed up with facts - or discarded for the unfounded opinion that they are.

I don't remember commenting on 3.5 sales. I remember projecting what I think 4th Ed. sales of a purely pen & paper incarnation of D&D might be, and I said I thought beyond the core rulebooks they would struggle. Thats a personal opinion, but its based on common sense.

You yourself have noted that you don't want a 4th Edition.

Heh. From my perspective? None. I am quite happy with what I've got, thanks.

Exactly! Therefore you have to create the interest.

I just don't like your model either. The continued survival of the D&D brand is of no interest or concern to me whatsoever.

So if you are Wizards of the Coast and you see that 4th Edition doesn't have that great an appeal to existing 3/3.5 gamers that means they have to create new gamers which means going mainstream.

Because they didn't need to. The Update Booklet and new entries in the DMG/MM covered the necessary ground. Those areas that could be remarketed were. This has nothing to do with 3.5 viability. It has to do with the stability of the existing rules. You are conflating the two.

So 4th Edition could be a series of free update booklets then.

 

[Rothe]

Funny, they used the D&D name for the Minis game and the sky didn't fall.

I like Upper Krust's idea for the most part, though I see the individual sets being sold with packs of tiles rather than a board. Call it something Like D&D Adventures - Valley of the Dinosaurs, or something like that.

....

I call BS however on the notion that it would somehow not be an RPG anymore. Many of us are using battlemaps and tiles already. Its not limiting. And besides, I feel that the RPG business is in decline because game companies haven't been creative enough with the presentation of their games. The RPG "genre" of games suffers from too narrow a focus IMO.(WOTC seems to be the first to actually show some innovation with it)

When you get down to it, the play experience is pretty much the same with most RPGs to date...guys sitting around a table with books, character sheets and dice. RPG companies have to start pushing the envelope a bit if they want these games to still be widely played in the years coming. WOTC has made more strides in the last 3 years with respect to game materials than the entire RPG industry has made since 1974. Upper Krusts idea is a good thought in a different direction, if you consider a game-in-a-box as a way of thinking outside the box.

Pretty much my views as well.

UK's ideas sound very good from a marketing perspective.
When it comes to whether it is "D&D" that will come down to what's in the rule books. OD&D had far simpler rules, still D&D, so making things simpler / harkening back to prior editions is not so bad; especially if the base can be upward compatible for people who want the more complex rules.

Much of what I see recommend is "simply" packaging with the game aids that make it play more smoothly and inspire. With these built in aids the game may not need to be simplified as much as one might think.

The box set could also be kept cost competitve by selling hard copy of the basic/mist frequently used rules, with all the advance/additional rules on an included CD. Maybe also on this CD are "card" templates so people can create there own. (I haven't read all posts so my apologies if already suggested).

In the end it harkens to the days of Basic D&D with the box set, including dice and an adventure. That sold very well IIRC compared to the three book format.

As this thread shows, you have some marketing hurdles. The package should appeal to adults, i.e., that the art and layout on the box should not scream 12 and under is our target demographic. Rather a family game appeal for adults, with a bit of this really for older kids appeal (16+) to get youngers kids (9-12) to want to play to be "older." As we can see, much is in a name. Dungeons & Pirates not as good as D&D: Pirates Edition. The former conntating a younger target audience than the latter.

Just my 2 cp.

 

[BlackMoria]

Upper Krust: You wanted to know why I support the concept you are putting forward but not call it D&D 4E.

As I stated, the changes (if I understand your concepts) are too large, which makes it a paradigm shift.

This might not be the best illustration but there is a significant difference between American baseball and English cricket, but they both have someone who pitches a ball, someone waving a stick with the purpose of hitting the ball and the concept of running 'bases' or an analog of bases to score. However, to call cricket some bastardized version of baseball is fighting words to cricket fans and vice versa. A majority of cricket fans would never watch a baseball game and vice versa for baseball fans. Why? While conceptually similar in concept, they are completely different games and it very uncommon to find a fan who likes both.

The current edition of D&D and its predecessors were principally pen and paper games with 3e marrying miniatures more closely by supporting them with rules. You can still play 3.5e without miniatures if one chooses and they are by no means absolutely mandatory. And previous versions of D&D had players using miniatures, just without more miniature focused rules.

Your concept changes D&D from a principally pen and paper game which supports miniature use to a boardgame concept which minimizes pen and paper and makes miniatures absolutely mandatory. Depending on impedimentation of the concept, even more stark changes in rules are probably necessary. But here is the rub - its NOT the same game now, just like baseball and cricket are not the same game, despite having a ball, bat, a hitter, and a pitcher(bowler).

Changing the paradigm of D&D from its pen and paper roots to a boardgame concept for 4e is tatamount to saying - this season we are playing by American baseball rules but next season, the rules of baseball will be played by English cricket rules. And that explains why the majority of voters in your poll are dead against it.

I like your ideas but called it D&D: The Next Generation or D&D: Gen X or whatever. Just don't call it 4e because it is now a very different game now.

 

[Mark Hope]

I don't remember commenting on 3.5 sales.

Er, apart from the bits where you do...

So if you are Wizards of the Coast and you see that 4th Edition doesn't have that great an appeal to existing 3/3.5 gamers that means they have to create new gamers which means going mainstream.

Well, that is the issue at the heart of this thread. You have put your model to existing 3e/3.5 gamers, not to the mainstream, and many of them have rejected it as a future incarnation of D&D, as your poll results show. I would be interested in hearing what non-gamers think about this, as they seem to be your best market at present.

So 4th Edition could be a series of free update booklets then.

Yup. I'd buy a set of free update booklets in a second ...

 

[Zendragon]

I'm not saying it's a terrible idea, just a terrible idea as a replacement for D&D- any edition. As a separate board game it might work, ala Talisman. As for Wizards not releasing any more product, Wizards will always release product to make money. I know people who bought the core 3 and nothing else. Homebrew campaign world that's been going since 1st edition. We play different continents and some different times, but you don't need Wizards supplements to play.