D&D 4E David Noonan on 4E "Cloudwatching" (Added Dave's newest comment from his blog)

[Shortman McLeod]

Why can't you accept that - in their opinion - the 4E designers are improving the game?

I agree with you; the WotC designers do genuinely believe they are improving the game (and perhaps they are; heck, we haven't seen 4e yet).

But my point was that it is nonsense to suggest that the introduction of 4e was motivated by ANYTHING other than profit. The suits at Hasbro looked at the balance sheet and said, "3.5 isn't profitable anymore. Time for 4.0."

And honestly, that's fine. They're a corporation; they need to be profitable to survive. But please don't start burying us in pro-4e and anti-3.5 propaganda and pretend that this is all a matter of "evolution of game design." It's about bucks, as the introduction of a new product always is. The fact that the WotC designers are excited about the new product and believe it is an improvement doesn't change that.

Put it another way: if 3.5 had been burning up sales charts and raking in millions of $$$, do you honestly think we'd be seeing 4e now? And do you honestly think WotC designers would be publicly musing about how awkward 3.5 is to play and how difficult it is to DM?

 

[KingCrab]

Ahh, you mere customers. Shaking your puny little hands at the clouds. You amuse me with your concern for our little storms and your shamanistic dancing, but such matters are truly above you little ones and we aren't going to pay the slightest attention. So deal with it.

That's pretty funny. Aside from the little bit at the end where he tells us our playing 3.5 will influence the outcome of 4ed (which I'm not sure is true) you hit the nail right on the head.

 

[KingCrab]

I consider there to be "Three" editions of 2E IMHO.

The base edition found in the rulebooks.

The base edition found in the rulebooks + the introduction of Kits in splatbooks. (Kits significantly changed the power of starting characters, moreso IMO than how BoNS or Tome of Magic changed the game)

The Skill & Powers/Spells & Magic/Combat & Tactics era which makes the change from 3.0 to 3.5 look like peanuts. One can get away with a marker and the 3.0 PHB in a 3.5 game but the S&P series is nowhere as lenient. Hell freaking no.

The biggest change in 2ed was the Faiths&Avatars/Powers&Pantheons cleric revolution that basically gave clerics all sorts of insane abilities sometimes adding an entire second class at little cost (clerics of Isis anyone?)

 

[Khaalis]

I just have to throw in a few comments after all this in this thread.

[rant on]

Yes WotC is a company, and there objective is to make a profit. However, how do you make a profit with a product? It must be a product that will sell and that is well received by the consumer. How do you improve sales? You improve the product.

This holds true in all consumer product industries, the most common analogy being the software industry. When we produce a piece of software, we as a company and as developers think the product is sound, viable and does the job we intended it to do. All is good, we sell the product. Over time however, we tend to find bugs (unintentional features as we call them) and come across better ways to do the intended job as well as receive feedback from users on what they would like to see in the product (new features). Additionally, as is a fact in any industry, product sales tend to level out as the market becomes saturated with the product. There is a point where you basically cannot sell any more product.

We listen to the users and start writing the next version of the software. This takes time and effort - corporate resources. This costs the company money. In the meantime the market is becoming saturated with the old product, making it time to push hard on getting the new product finished. Once we do, do we give away the new product for free or do we charge? Of course we offer the new product as a new version. It is up to the user to determine if they want to upgrade or not. If we weren't going to make money, we wouldn't make the product in the first place. This doesn't mean we don't want to improve on what we have created.

This is the same scenario with D&D. 3X has been around for years. It was the best game the designers could make at the time and they thought it was sound, viable, fun and innovative. It was light years ahead (IMHO) than 2E. It was a good system. Consumers liked the product, bought it and played it. All was good... for a while.

Then the users began to find bugs and started asking for new features. There are millions of threads and posts just between here and the WotC boards on House Rules, Alternate Systems, "How to Balance the X Class", Spellpoints, etc. If people were so joyously happy with 3X, these things wouldn't exist. However, the general indication from these millions of posts, was that 3X needed revision. It had issues. There were better ways to accomplish the goal. Also, the market has become saturated. There are not many D&Ders who do NOT have 3X. There are also only so many "add-ons" one can create for the system. People have been complaining for at least the last year that they are tired of the "splat books". (Granted some people complain just to complain.)

WotC has seen all of this. They have seen the good and the bad to come from 3X. And yes they have watched sales and marketing trends. They have analyzed all of this and answered all of those situations and demands by creating 4E.

As someone else posted in this thread (too lazy to go back and find the quote)... "Improving the product and making money are NOT mutually exclusive". You can and DO achieve both hand in hand. I hate to say it to all the "WotC are the devil for wanting profit" types, but money is the reason any company is in business. I find it incredibly unfair to attack WotC for selling their product when the same said people are obviously fine with spending money on other gaming material, or that "upgrade" anything else in they own.

Do you upgrade your PC? Do you upgrade software? Do you upgrade your cell phone? Do you upgrade from VHS to DVD or DVD to BlueRay? Do you upgrade from corded to wireless? It is all the same basic premise.

Do I personally think 4E is the "greatest thing since sliced bread"? No. First off I haven't seen it. Secondly, its a highly complex product to produce. There are ALWAYS going to be parts of it that people don't like or think could have been better. This is always the case with intellectual properties. What I do think is that I see a lot in what we already know that makes me think there will definitely be some improvement over 3X. I am intrigued. I will watch, listen, and research to make an informed purchasing decision when the time comes. I am not going to sit here at this early stage and say that 4E is crap or fantastic, or that WotC is evil for coming out with 4E. Thats just nonsense IMHO.

As for Dave's Blog, I really can't see how people could react so negatively to it. The analogy is a good one. 4E IS like cloud watching. It is coming in May one way or the other. Whether you buy it or not is up to you as the consumer, but that isn't going to stop it from being released. The research that has been conducted (and trust me a lot of market research has been conducted over the past 3 years) has indicated it is a viable time for 4E, and that the market will not only bear the release, but make it a profitable release. We as consumers cannot control that 4E is coming out, nor can we control its release date. However, what we CAN do is influence the form in which it comes out. WotC is listening to the consumer. They are gaging what we want to see in our game system, and how we think the system can be improved. This is a good thing. They could simply have ignored us (can we say TSR, Paladium, etc.)

[rant off]

JMHO, YMMV.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Making money and improving the game are not mutually exclusive.

True. Nor are they mutually dependent.

Also, it really comes down to the context that is assumed, regarding "improvement". Should this imply a game as most existing DMs and/or players might prefer it to be? Or as a significant number of people from a previously [largely] untapped (untargeted) demographic might want it? Or. . .

 

[Baron Opal]

Bravo, Khaalis.

 

[Glyfair]

But my point was that it is nonsense to suggest that the introduction of 4e was motivated by ANYTHING other than profit. The suits at Hasbro looked at the balance sheet and said, "3.5 isn't profitable anymore. Time for 4.0."

Even if I believe you have proof of that, how is that even relevant?

Either the new games works for me and is worth buying, or doesn't work for me and isn't worth buying. The reason they decided to make the change shouldn't factor into my buying decision.

I still play 3.5 and I'm sorry I dont find it a hard game to run and the few problems I have with it I just adjust. that's what alot players and GM's do.

I think if you look at the general buzz out there, you'll see that more and more D&D players have been feeling dissatisfied with the system and have been actively looking for new systems because of thing in the system that don't work. Many that haven't done that have been trying to "fix" what isn't working. It's very hard when the things that don't work are a key part of the system.

Now, I agree that everything they are fixing isn't necessarily something that doesn't work for everyone. For example, I never had a problem with the CR system, but many others did. That doesn't mean I'm not open to a change that is better than the current CR system.

Then there are other things that weren't horrible, but were becoming a headache. The so called "Christmas tree effect" was one. I did find it very annoying that a high level wizard required a magic item to increase his INT to be effective. It takes away from the coolness of magic items when they aren't optional bits but required equipment. I It doesn't mean the game is unplayable because that effect is there. It does mean the game would be more fun is the problem is fixed.

4E sounds less like a fix and more like, for the most part, a new system with just the minimum of the core D20 elements. For all that I might as well be playing another system.

It sort of is, but I'm sure we could argue all day on whether it's the "minimum of core d20 elements." If you listen to the GenCon interviews you'll have heard the designers say that their mandate was to improve the system, and not worry about keeping to the "sacred cows" of the old system (although they did consider which changes would be "too much).

There mandate wasn't to go out and make as many changes as possible. It was to not worry about how many changes would be necessary to improve the game.

 

[Khaalis]

Even if I believe you have proof of that, how is that even relevant?
Either the new games works for me and is worth buying, or doesn't work for me and isn't worth buying. The reason decided to make the change shouldn't factor into my buying decision.

Exactly!
Do you think SONY had any other reason for producing the Playstation 3? It is an advancement in technology but they made it because they knew they could SELL it. That is what a business does. If WotC/Hasbro were not going to make money, you wouldn't HAVE D&D. Simple as that.

 

[wedgeski]

FFS, how many times are folks supposed to buy Ravenloft?

As many times as they want? The fact that Grappling grinds my combats to a halt doesn't make Expedition to Ravenloft any less of a quality product.

 

[Raven Crowking]

No, I don't think so. Maybe character creation in 3E suffers in comparison to AD&D and D&D, but they weren't easy games. Not in the slightest. In fact, I think that is what attracted many people.

I didn't say that they were easy games. You missed my point.

EDIT: Easy to play is not the same as an easy game. Easy to make a character is not the same as an easy game.

As I said earlier:

In order to regain anything like the popularity of 1e, 4e would have to be easy to learn for newcomers, and quick to make characters for old hands, with a lot of added complexity that allows you to tweak the system the way you want, but can be ignored if you prefer to ignore it. You also need flavourful text that pulls you into trying the mechanics, and allows you to visualize it in your head.​