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

[MerricB]

There is an interesting parallel to note here.

Now, when Wizards of the Coast brought out Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 - how many books did they resell? Players Handbook, Dungeon Masters Guide, Monster Manual, Psionics Handbook (I think)...that was about it.

I think you've drawn a false conclusion here.
* Sword & Fist, Defenders of the Faith, etc. were reprinted (and expanded), though with different titles.
* There are very few 3.0 generic D&D books that aren't adventures.

A look at books of 3e:
"Psionic's Handbook" - redone in 3.5e
"Song and Silence" - redone in 3.5e as Complete Adventurer
"Sword and Fist" - redone in 3.5e as Complete Warrior
"Tome and Blood" - redone in 3.5e as Complete Arcane
"Defenders of the Faith" - redone in 3.5e as Complete Divine
"Masters of the Wild" - redone in 3.5e (split between Complete books)
"Hero Builder's Guidebook" - poorly received
"Enemies and Allies" - poorly received
"Manual of the Planes" - crunchy bits incorporated in DMG 3.5e
"Book of Challenges" - basically bits of an adventure, so no need to reprint.
"Book of Vile Darkness" - not reprinted
"Deities and Demigods" - poorly received
"Epic Level Handbook" - poorly received, crunchy bits incorporated in DMG 3.5e and Complete books
"Monster Manual II" - web update to 3.5e
"Stronghold Builder's Guidebook" - poorly received
"Arms and Equipment Guide" - hmm. MIC?
"Savage Species" - rules incorporated in 3.5e; almost 3.5e itself.
"Fiend Folio" - almost 3.5e

That's the complete list of generic D&D products for 2000 until the July 2003 release of 3.5e. There weren't many books.

Cheers!

 

[phindar]

Look at the way they market the Heroscape game. It's a simplified wargame rather than a simplified rpg, but once you get to the point of boxed set dungeons with pre-made figures, you're blurring the line plenty as it is. The idea as it is being described sounds similar to this, and as neat as the Heroscape minis look (a friend of mine has picked up a few), the game itself isn't what I'm looking for in a role-playing game.

I'd only be interested in this type of game for the figs I could pick up on the secondary market.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey Shin!

The three core rulebooks are enough to run the game. If someone bought the three core rulebooks and used those and never bought another book after that they'd still be able to play D&D. So yeah, three core rulebooks are the whole shebang.

So they would be able to play as Epic Psionic Warforged Drunken Masters in a campaign where the main antagonists were Yugoloths...is that correct?

The core rulebooks are no more 'the whole shebang' than the boxed set format I am suggesting.

The supplements are there simply to make money for the company and to do some of hte work that players and DM's dont wont to do for themselves.

The supplements Extra boxed sets are there simply to make money for the company and to do some of hte work that players and DM's dont wont to do for themselves.

...with nods to Nifft for the strikethrough text idea.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey MerricB dude!

By the way I wanted to ask you your thoughts on the Descent game you mentioned. Feel free to post here, personal message or email me, whichever you think more apropos.

I think you've drawn a false conclusion here.
* Sword & Fist, Defenders of the Faith, etc. were reprinted (and expanded), though with different titles.

Certainly large chunks of those books (which were 90% crunch) found their way into the 'Complete' Series. But didn't this regurgitated material comprise only about 50% of those books.

Also the splatbooks were initially black & white. So the Complete series did add that splash of colour as an extra incentive.

* There are very few 3.0 generic D&D books that aren't adventures.

A look at books of 3e:
"Psionic's Handbook" - redone in 3.5e
"Song and Silence" - redone in 3.5e as Complete Adventurer
"Sword and Fist" - redone in 3.5e as Complete Warrior
"Tome and Blood" - redone in 3.5e as Complete Arcane
"Defenders of the Faith" - redone in 3.5e as Complete Divine
"Masters of the Wild" - redone in 3.5e (split between Complete books)
"Hero Builder's Guidebook" - poorly received
"Enemies and Allies" - poorly received
"Manual of the Planes" - crunchy bits incorporated in DMG 3.5e
"Book of Challenges" - basically bits of an adventure, so no need to reprint.
"Book of Vile Darkness" - not reprinted
"Deities and Demigods" - poorly received
"Epic Level Handbook" - poorly received, crunchy bits incorporated in DMG 3.5e and Complete books
"Monster Manual II" - web update to 3.5e
"Stronghold Builder's Guidebook" - poorly received
"Arms and Equipment Guide" - hmm. MIC?
"Savage Species" - rules incorporated in 3.5e; almost 3.5e itself.
"Fiend Folio" - almost 3.5e

That's the complete list of generic D&D products for 2000 until the July 2003 release of 3.5e. There weren't many books.

Thanks for that. It is indeed less books than I anticipated, they really rushed 3.5 upon us.

Assuming a hypothetical pen & paper 4th edition, beyond the core rulebooks, WotC would be far more likely to regurgitate crunch than fluff.

 

[Ranger REG]

Hey Ranger REG!

Occam's Razor says otherwise.

Occam and his Razor deeply offend the collective "intelligence" of the D&D fan community.

So you would actually seek to target and pursue a smaller demographic than the game currently does?

17-27 age group is not a small demographic. Granted, not many are in college or pursuing higher education of the normal intelligence level, but they'd like to pretend they do. Sort of like wearing fake horn-rimmed glasses to look smart. Geek faux.

I'd love to see the two of us go head to head on the Apprentice and see who racks up the most sales...bottom line is, at least you would get to meet Ivanka Trump.

I dunno. Is assassination allowed in the rules?

I already have mensa-like insight...its overrated.

Ah, do you have Tweet's mensa-like insight? No gamer is more overly complex than Tweet.

Anyone suggesting the game should become more complex (which it indirectly seems you are) doesn't have a good grasp on the state of the market as far as I can see.

At the same time, no gamers want to touch a rulebook that begins with "See Carlos. See Carlos roll three d6s..."

Hey, I'm just reciting what happened when WotC asked us if they want an easy-to-understand ruleset ... affectionately asking if they should dumb down the rules. We said no in 1999, and in 2000, we got rules-heavy. Sure, in light of this we got some competitors offering rules-lite RPGs but they haven't reach the popularity of 3e.

Don't Dumb Down, Smart Up. The rules should not be for Joe Average. The rules should be for Stephen Hawking.

[sblock]This message is paid for by People Of Radical Norms ... PORNs. [/sblock]

 

[MerricB]

Hey MerricB dude!

By the way I wanted to ask you your thoughts on the Descent game you mentioned. Feel free to post here, personal message or email me, whichever you think more apropos.

Be happy to... soon.

Thanks for that. It is indeed less books than I anticipated, they really rushed 3.5 upon us.

The plan for 3e (see Dancey) was that the PHB would be the main seller, and Wizards would only produce the minimum number of support books. Other companies would do the rest of the support (primarily adventures). Every so often, the core books would be updated with the best developments over the last few years (primarily driven by third party companiese). The publishing schedule was a lot less aggressive than 3.5e's was last year.

However, it seems that flaws in that approach were discovered by 2002. I have a theory that you can't employ a R&D department if they don't publish things constantly. The team to do the core book update can't be kept around just to do that job every few years, and the release schedule was too small to keep D&D's R&D around. What made things worse was that one of the primary support areas for D&D - adventures - were found to be just as unprofitable for 3rd party publishers, and they had less incentive.

Adventures are good for Wizards to produce because they help sales of the PHB. Even if you don't make as much money from the adventure, you do increase PHB sales. A 3rd party publisher doesn't have the PHB...

So, Wizards needed a much more aggressive plan for publishing. They also saw that accessories, such as Minis, Battlemats, Dice, etc. could also do well. They were helped by the advent of MageKnight, which opened up the world of the CMG, and eventually D&D Miniatures.

(As an aside, D&D Miniatures is one of Wizards' greatest creations. Chainmail, which wasn't helped by a confused set of goals and an occasionally hostile management team, was ultimately trying to compete with Warhammer and the established metal miniatures lines like Reaper. D&D Miniatures was competing with MageKnight, and did almost everything better: better balance, better rarity, and, importantly, a second use in being minis for the most popular RPG!)

I consider 3.5e to have come at the right time: D&D was about to change its production plan. By having it come then, only a few Wizards books were made obsolete. The revisions to the rules gave a better platform for the supplements than 3e provided.

Assuming a hypothetical pen & paper 4th edition, beyond the core rulebooks, WotC would be far more likely to regurgitate crunch than fluff.

Definitely. See FR.

Cheers!

 

[cthulhu_duck]

In response to my question of I'm not sure who you think the market for this would be?

Roleplayers.
Boardgamers.
Miniatures Collectors.
Kids.
Families.

Well, based on the poll results, #1 in your list aren't in the market for this. #2 already have products - and products which are aimed at boardgamers. #3 - I don't believe the market for D&D miniature true collectors is that big. #4 - I just don't see 'Kids' getting into this. #5 - See answer for #4.

I think you've convinced yourself that this is a really good idea - the problem being that you don't seem to have done any analysis on what might not work with this idea, and your market research seems to be based on 'I can sell this great idea to these people' - rather than the other way around of 'what do these people want?'

You keep asking 'why not?' in response to people stating they wouldn't play this - if you're serious about making a game to sell to roleplayers (#1 in your list above), shouldn't you already had some understanding of the market so that we don't have to explain to you why your idea wouldn't work for us?

 

[DeadlyUematsu]

UK.

Make me this.

NOW.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

Hey Shin!
So they would be able to play as Epic Psionic Warforged Drunken Masters in a campaign where the main antagonists were Yugoloths...is that correct?

No, assuming that they would actually care to. Which I might point out since were being all extremist in our examples not everyone is going to want to play an Epic Psionic Warforged Drunken Master. Those that would are going to seek out the materials with which to do so, the rest of us are going to use the core rules to play the game.

But to say that you cant play D&D with only the core rules (which you seem dead set on insisting) is..well untrue, no matter how many Psionic Warforged twinks you throw at me.

 

[Aus_Snow]

If this is "the future of 4th Edition D&D", then they (the company) will have lost one fairly dedicated customer here.

Luckily, I very much doubt that it is.