D&D 5E D&DN going down the wrong path for everyone.

[Mournblade94]

That's the real frustration for 4e players, isn't it? It's the OPPORTUNITY COST of doing a "retro D&D mishmash" that appears to be serving no one, when they KNOW that a productive, detailed re-work of the 4e core could really give them something special. And realizing that opportunity is going to be lost, at least until someone with the guts and fortitude comes up with an OGL "Pathfinderized" 4e clone. Put in that light, I can see how that would be incredibly frustrating, especially when it feels like most of the 3e and prior crowd is giving Next a resounding "meh" to this point.

3e-ites don't need another fantasy D20 system nearly as much as the 4e aficionados need a revamped, cleaned up, progressive take of 4e.

I disagree with this. I love PATHFINDER. There is no game that could take me away from PATHFINDER except for Dungeons and Dragons. I did not want or need 4e. It broke to many things I like in order to fix problems I found were minor.

Now though, it appears I am getting D&D back. The D&D I want back. So far it is shaping up to something I like. If this game offers me a good deal of character customability and is as simple as AD&D to DM, I have hit the Jackpot. It also appears so far I can port new material from Pathfinder over to D&D.

SO in terms of game support, I need 5e much more than a streamlined Pathfinder or 4e.

I am not giving up on Pathfinder, they are going to get my money regardless. I buy AP's, and all of their RPG books. I buy Golarion source material to mine ideas for Forgotten Realms. Their stuff is too good to give up.

With Next approaching, that means I will have Pathfinder products enhancing my D&D game.

All people can do is vote with their wallet. I don't think WOTC would suddenly cancel 4e and make a new edition because of people giving criticism on the internet. They must have sales information none of us are privy too, because otherwise making Next is a stupid move. If their sales data is showing that 4e was a business failure (As Scott Rouse hinted at several times), it would actually be a worse move for them to develop a streamlined 4e, rather than try to get a good number of thier old fanbase back.

 

[DnD_Dad]

I'll play whatever game is being ran. If it has dungeons, dragons and treasure then I'm in. Mechanics are not that big of a deal as I tend to roll play more than anything else. In fact I played AD&D on Monday and I didn't even take out my character sheet, and I think I rolled once or twice. People that like mechanics and have a lot of money invested in a system don't want to buy a new system. Like me, I own a lot of 2nd edition stuff and I'll run anything I own, but I'm not against playing in someone else's game in a different system.

 

[TwoSix]

That's the real frustration for 4e players, isn't it? It's the OPPORTUNITY COST of doing a "retro D&D mishmash" that appears to be serving no one, when they KNOW that a productive, detailed re-work of the 4e core could really give them something special. And realizing that opportunity is going to be lost, at least until someone with the guts and fortitude comes up with an OGL "Pathfinderized" 4e clone. Put in that light, I can see how that would be incredibly frustrating, especially when it feels like most of the 3e and prior crowd is giving Next a resounding "meh" to this point.

3e-ites don't need another fantasy D20 system nearly as much as the 4e aficionados need a revamped, cleaned up, progressive take of 4e.

So, so, true.

Looking for game designer/coder to take my Kickstarter money for an OGL 4e with character builder!

 

[SkidAce]

I'll play whatever game is being ran. If it has dungeons, dragons and treasure then I'm in. Mechanics are not that big of a deal as I tend to roll play more than anything else. In fact I played AD&D on Monday and I didn't even take out my character sheet, and I think I rolled once or twice. People that like mechanics and have a lot of money invested in a system don't want to buy a new system. Like me, I own a lot of 2nd edition stuff and I'll run anything I own, but I'm not against playing in someone else's game in a different system.

Hoorah!

 

[Libramarian]

I'll play whatever game is being ran. If it has dungeons, dragons and treasure then I'm in. Mechanics are not that big of a deal as I tend to roll play more than anything else. In fact I played AD&D on Monday and I didn't even take out my character sheet, and I think I rolled once or twice. People that like mechanics and have a lot of money invested in a system don't want to buy a new system. Like me, I own a lot of 2nd edition stuff and I'll run anything I own, but I'm not against playing in someone else's game in a different system.

I think you're exactly the sort of person DDN is being designed for.

 

[TwoSix]

I think you're exactly the sort of person DDN is being designed for.

I'm sure they'll do well with "Don't care about the rules? Then buy our new rules!" as a sales pitch.

 

[delericho]

I think you're exactly the sort of person DDN is being designed for.

Actually, if the goal is profitability, there are two groups WotC should ignore completely when designing 5e: those who won't under any circumstances switch to the new edition, and those who certainly will. Because any effort made to reach those two groups is wasted - it's not going to result in additional sales.

 

[innerdude]

Actually, if the goal is profitability, there are two groups WotC should ignore completely when designing 5e: those who won't under any circumstances switch to the new edition, and those who certainly will. Because any effort made to reach those two groups is wasted - it's not going to result in additional sales.

Strangely, the design goals seem to be very much aimed at one of the two---they're clearly trying to target 3e holdovers and the OSR crowd, many of whom are going to be a very hard "sell" on Next.

(But there's assuredly going to be "early adopters" who just migrate with the system regardless, just out of brand loyalty, and yeah, why market to them?)

 

[innerdude]

I guess what I'm saying is that I really no longer see a need for animosity or fighting about this. My needs are met elsewhere now. If 4th edition fans were to shout, "Screw 3rd edition, screw the old school, cater to us and give us every little thing we want even if the other gamers hate it," I would probably respond with, "Yeah, give it to 'em."

It's funny, but I'm very much okay with that as well. When 4e rolled out, I'll admit it felt like I was losing something, some intangible "substance" that was going to make it more difficult to find the type of game and group with which I wanted to play.

I was pretty reactionary about it too. Lots of verbal and mental gyrations and hand-wringing. And then I finally figured out, 4e wasn't going anywhere. It existed, and was even being enthusiastically adopted in some circles. And yeah, it annoyed me (and to a point, still does in some very small ways) that 4e had the official stamp of "This is D&D!" approval, because in the few times I played it, it produced some very uneven at best RPG experiences. I felt that it wasn't going to serve the hobby or new players well if "At Launch 4e" was considered the "baseline RPG experience."

However, after looking around and finding some excellent alternatives, I came to the simple realization that though "D&D" had been "my game" in the past, the current iteration simply wasn't. (Ironically, in that regard I owe WotC a huge debt of gratitude for helping me branch out into new directions, and discovering new games. I really doubt that would've happened if 4e had been more akin to Pathfinder than its actual end result.)

But if wasn't "my game" anymore, it was definitely "other people's" game, and once my ill-begotten disdain dissipated (in no small part to the intelligent, thoughtful individuals who champion 4e on these boards), it became clear that for the true 4e die-hards, this really was THEIR game--it delivered an experience for them that no other RPG does. And yeah, it's not "my D&D" anymore---but I happen to like the stuff that's now "my D&D" better than the stuff that actually has D&D printed on the cover, so why worry?

So now, like you said [MENTION=44797]aboyd[/MENTION], I'm served incredibly well for my needs--so why not cater to the 4e fans? It's not "my game" anymore, but clearly those who feel that sense of "ownership" will never be served by something that goes backwards. So for the 4e players, let 'em have their game. Let their loyalty and passion be rewarded.

(The problem is, to WotC the "business" of D&D is a little more complex than that.)

 

[El Mahdi]

I just want to comment on those numbers a little bit. I'm not counting the 'ambivalent' votes because they either don't care, or are reserving judgment for after release, or will just play whatever the new edition is regardless.

I'll point out that while slightly less than 50% of respondents said they either loved it or really liked it, about 30% either do not like it or really hate it. Not really great numbers for an edition whose stated aim is to unify everyone under a big tent that is labelled 'D&D'. This looks like market fragmentation to me - the same issue plaguing every edition since the boom in the 80s.

Even if you assume for a moment that the ambivalent votes ALL side with those who love it (which is unlikely), that still leaves 25-30% - between a full quarter and a third of the potential market doesn't like what's happening. That's not good news. And if the ambivalents all go the other way (equally unlikely, but it's just for illustration) then you're looking at 50/50. That's really not good news.

If the numbers were closer to 80 or 90% in approval or ambivalence, with minimal 'dislike' or 'hate' votes, that's a different story, but we're not seeing that.

I don't disagree with your analysis of the numbers, though I do disagree with your conclusion. At this stage, I believe the majority being happy with D&D Next would spell doom for the game. The amount of people likeing it, and the amount of people who have issues with it, seem just about what you should have (and likely what a designer would prefer) at this point. This is actually an indication of a healthy playtest, and a game that's progressing towards it's goals and a successful release.

However, that's not what I was using that data for. I'd like to refocus back onto what I was using that data to directly refute:

D&DN going down the wrong path for everyone.

It's axiomatic that if you try to please everyone, you end up pleasing no one.

I think D&DN is heading down this road...

The facts completely refute the above statements.


Then when you add in such statements as the following ones, all credibility evaporates.

...I think you can roughly divide the D&D community into two main camps; the 3E/PF crowd and the 4E crowd. I realize there are OD&D, 1E, and 2E players out there, but I find that in most arguments, they're gonna come down on the side of the 3rd Edition folks. They'll remain united so long as the 4E people are a threat.

Absolutely False. The majority of gamers do not see D&D as an Us vs. Them situation. It's small vocal minorities creating the perception that this is so.

...Sadly, what I'm seeing over on the Wizards boards is that 3E folks are unhappy with things like dissociative self-healing mechanics (hand waved through the use of "healing kits"), 4E people are unhappy with open ended interpretation of what a class represents (there's a thread claiming that "fighter is not a class", which was the first time I realized that the 3E and 4E crowds have a fundamentally different understanding of what a class represents). There's a lot more, but just two examples.

Stating anecdotal and biased examples as evidence of the attitudes for entire sections of the D&D fan base, is an absolute failure toward making ones point right from the start. I know for a fact that there are 3E fans that do like the way healing works in D&D Next, just as there are 4E fans that also like D&D Next.

What adembroski is seeing are simply the vocal fans. The amount of noise on the boards is not consistent with the polling (which includes the non-vocal fans).

...I made the comment in one thread that I believed that Wizards has an opportunity with D&DN to either A.) win back the 3e crowd or B.) retain and grow the 4e crowd, but it would be difficult to do both, and on their current path, they'll accomplish neither. It was sort of off-hand at the time and I didn't really think about it before I posted it, but it got several replies in agreement and spawned a bit of a side conversation on its own.

Yet despite this opinion their are D&D fans...D&D fans running the full spectrum of edition preferences...that wholeheartedly disagree. and informal polls such as above, and the formal polling data released by WotC, that definitively show the trend is not leaning in the direction adembroski thinks it is.

...The more I think about it, the more I think the very mentality that the design team is taking is going to doom the product. As a 3E guy myself, I actually feel like the best thing Wizards can do at this point is re-up on the ideas that produced 4th Edition and grow that market rather than attempting to bring two disparate groups together and missing the mark with both. Accept that the Fantasy RPG market has been divided into two markets, and target the one you already have, make them your own, and let Paizo pick up the remainder.

Well maybe it's because (and I'm just spitballing here) the financial reality that WotC has encountered attempting to do this very thing has shown them how catastrophic this approach is...?



Mark "El Mahdi" Armstrong