D&D has "jumped the shark"

[Mouseferatu]

At one of the D&D Q&A seminars at Gencon, the comparison was made that the change from 3x to 4e would be more akin to the change from 1e to 2e than from 2e to 3e. Still, this pushes the rules set further from the 1e baseline. And therein lies the rub.

I got the impression that it was somewhere between, actually. That it was more than the 1E/2E change, but less than the 2E/3E change.

If you started with 3e, no, D&D has likely not jumped the shark with 4e from what we know at this point.

If you started with 1e, yes, D&D has jumped the shark with 4e, from what we know; actually it jumped the shark with 3e.

I strongly, strongly disagree. "Jump the shark" doesn't just mean "change." It means "begin a downhill slide that is never repaired or arrested."

I started with 1E. (Technically with Basic, but I switched after only a few months.) I've been playing, with breaks here and there, ever since. And I do not consider the game to have jumped the shark, either with 3E or what I've heard of 4E.

Further, I don't consider it to have lost very much of what makes D&D D&D. And in fact--again, judging by what I've heard of 4E--I think 4E makes the game more D&D than 3E was. (3E went a little too far back to the game's tactical roots for my taste.)

 

[wayne62682]

I've heard enough, and so has many other gamers out there. D&D 4E will make the game unrecognizable to people from any edition. Let's start with the obvious ones:

---Some iconic Classes are getting kicked

So? If I recall 2nd edition got rid of the Monk and the then-class Assassin, and turned the then-PrC-like Bard into a weak main class. If it's going to be streamlined and allow for more player choice, that's a good thing.

---Some iconic Races are getting kicked

So? They're not gone for good. Anything not in the 4E PHB will be either available in the Monster Manual or online

---Spell levels go to 25th (that's supposed to be SIMPLER!?)

Because magic right now is oh-so-easy. :\ I don't mind higher levels if they get rid of the breaking spells (save-or-die, save-or-suck, the whole line of polymorph, gate, etc.)

---Beholders have 9 eyestalks, not 10

This is an argument? Who cares how many eyestalks a beholder has!

---They'll be working on 5E not too long after 4E is released to repeat this process again

Evolve or die. Just like with everything else in the world.

---Vancian magic is almost gone

And it's about 30 years late. Vancian casting is utter garbage and should have been killed years ago.

---The rules are turning D&D into an MMORPG and video game

Care to cite some? Without bringing up the words "online content" or "virtual gaming" or any synonyms for them. The rules are being simplified. Simplified != turning it into a videogame. And besides, OD&D was more like a videogame than anything I've ever seen.

Honestly, if you don't like the direction D&D is going in, then don't play it. Go back to playing OD&D or 1E or whatever suits your fancy and doesn't "stink of MMORPGs". Sacred Cows should not linger around just by virtue of being sacred cows. The whole nonsense of "D&D isn't D&D without x [where X is 1+ of Vancian magic/Alignment/Six Abilities/Classes/Levels/etc]" isn't an argument, it's saying that the game shouldn't change because this is how things were done 30 years ago, and that's how they should be done now. If we followed that logic, nothing would ever innovate. And, I don't know about you, but I'd rather have innovation and evolution rather than cling to 30-year old ideas just because "D&D has always had x". Always having "x" doesn't mean that x was any good in the first place.

Just my three cents.

 

[Xyxox]

And its folks like you that are killing D&D.

It's cool, though, because I'm the one that'll have the last laugh once you're into your precious 4E for a few years and they announce 5E. What will you say then?

How about soething like this?

EXCELLENT!!!

I've played D&D for more than thirty years now.

AD&D was not the end of the world.

Second edition was not the end of the world.

Third edition was not the end of the world

3.5 was not the end of the world.

4E will not be the end of the world.

5E will not be the end of the world.

Get it? If ypou don't like the idea of 4E, stick with your favorite edition. It doesn't matter. 4E will be a monstrous success and WotC will be putting ideas away for a 5E as 4E rolls out and is adopted.

 

[Teflon Billy]

I'm still completely in the dark as to how 4E will no longer "be" D&D.

I mean, there have been significant differences in every edition. I mean, take a look at the 2E ranger compared to it's 1E predecessor.

Look at Multiclassing.

Look at the inclusion of Races rather than just making Elf, Dwarf and Halfling classes.

I mean, there have been some pretty night-and-day changes from edition to edition and I don't think any of them has ever been declared "not D&D" (except by Diaglo )

This whole argument seems borderline nonsensical.

 

[coyote6]

If you started with 1e, yes, D&D has jumped the shark with 4e, from what we know; actually it jumped the shark with 3e.

Incorrect. I started with AD&D 1e (I still have the books), and D&D hasn't jumped the shark with 3e. I won't judge 4e, as I haven't read it, let alone played it.

 

[Xyxox]

I'm still completely in the dark as to how 4E will no longer "be" D&D.

I mean, there have been significant differences in every edition. I mean, take a look at the 2E ranger compared to it's 1E predecessor.

Look at Multiclassing.

Look at the inclusion of Races rather than just making Elf, Dwarf and Halfling classes.

I mean, there have been some pretty night-and-day changes from edition to edition and I don't think any of them has ever been declared "not D&D" (except by Diaglo )

This whole argument seems borderline nonsensical.

There is only one purist argument about D&D and shark jumping.

D&D JUMPED THE SHARK WITH THE GREYHAWK SUPPLEMENT, AND DON'T GET ME STARTED ON BLACKMOOR!!!!!!

 

[Kanegrundar]

The only thing I wonder whenever I see a "ZOMG!@ DA SKY IZ FALLIN'" thread about 4E, or just about every Razz post (seriously, dude, you don't want a new edition, we got it two years ago), is a lack of new material really killing your favorite edition? Ask Diaglo if each new edition since OD&D has hurt his game. Ask the tons of players that play all the other earlier games if D&D going on to another edition has hurt their games as well.

Even if that's not the point of these tirades, who do you think you're going to convince, Razz? Do you really think you're rants are going to raise some sort of grassroots effort that will make WotC see the "error" of their ways? I can understand being upset, to a point, but after week after week of rants on the various things that are supposedly killing D&D from "bad" players to 4th edition, with no real rally of people subscribing to your newsletter that you'd just give up and focus on playing whatever version of D&D makes you happy instead of CONSTANTLY complaining about it.

 

[delericho]

If I may paraphrase or reinterpret the OP question - after how many editions, wherein D&D sees significant rules changes sufficient to justify a news edition, does the term "D&D" become meaningless as definitional of any particular rules set?

A fair point.

For me, D&D has long since become unrecognisable as the same game I played when I started (Basic/Expert/Companion D&D). The rules, obviously, have changed hugely, but those rule changes have had a knock-on effect in the manner in which the whole game is played.

I used to think that the changes were absolutely a good thing - so much of the math in BD&D was backwards or clunky. Now, I'm really not so sure. I think I probably had a lot more fun in the old days.

But is that just me? Is it perhaps the people I now game with? Is it the rose-coloured glasses of nostalgia?

I do know that I can't go back. The knowledge that the system is so wonky would always jar me out of the game. So, what I really need is essentially BD&D built with the d20 engine. Perhaps Castles & Crusades is such a thing? (My initial assessment suggested that wasn't for me, but that was a very quick look. Besides, my tastes have changed somewhat since then.)

In any case, the impending move to 4e doesn't bother me in the least. If it takes the same game experience and simplifies the rules (without dumbing down), and makes it quicker, easier and more fun, then that will be good. If it changes the game experience dramatically, that might be good, too.

And if it sucks, then never mind. I have enough 3e material to last a lifetime, and even if I didn't I have the ability to generate that material myself.

 

[Rel]

Nothing else good is going to come from this thread. It's closed.

Also and a great many of you may wish to jot this down, we don't tell folks to "get the hell over it already" here at ENWorld, no matter how badly we think that they should do exactly that. Failure to comply results in a 3-day ban.