Disappointed in 4e

[RefinedBean]

[snark] I, too, am disappointed in 4E. My dream of playing a Unicorn Bard through the heroic tier (and NO OTHER TIER, by god) are dashed. Ruined.[/end snark]

Anyway, if a company I enjoy and support (WotC, but it could be anyone else) feels it's the best business sense to stretch things out a bit, I'm fine with that. So far, the supplements have been equal in quality (in my opinion) to the core three, and that's all I can really ask for.

The only disappointments I've had in 4E so far is the muddled Skill Challenge and Stealth madness goin' on. Oh, and that one can't let out a bloodcurling roar after killing an enemy with a charge, since they can't take any more actions (not even free ones).

 

[Jasperak]

That's not true at all, actually. Television programming has tremendous fixed costs, which they must recoup, but tiny variable costs. That is, it costs a lot to make shows, but it doesn't cost much to let one more person watch a show.

If they only charged you for your favorite channel, they'd have to charge you much, much more for it. It's not like its costs a lot less money to only provide you one channel to your taste.

You are absolutely right and why I hate using analogies. I was using that analogy to illustrate my issue with bundling stuff that I want with a whole mess that I don't.

My point is that it would cost WOTC nothing to split their sales strategy by tiers instead of how they are doing it now. For those people that don't care, they will buy all six or nine of the core rulebooks anyway. I on the other hand, instead of buying the three or six that I want, buy none.

 

[garyh]

My problem with WOTC's sales strategy is they want me to buy 5 books to cover the same level of play as 3 books or sets in any other edition did, and give me the same amount of options.

But buying the PHB2 and PHB3 (assuming those are the 4th and 5th books) doesn't give you the "same amount of options" as the core 3 in 3rd. In third, you had 7 races and 11 classes in PHB1. If you get PHB1/2/3 in 4th, you'll have 24 races and 24 classes. Just because the bard wasn't one of those first 8 PHB 1 classes in 4e doesn't mean the other new options in the PHB2 don't exist.

 

[Jasperak]

But buying the PHB2 and PHB3 (assuming those are the 4th and 5th books) doesn't give you the "same amount of options" as the core 3 in 3rd. In third, you had 7 races and 11 classes in PHB1. If you get PHB1/2/3 in 4th, you'll have 24 races and 24 classes. Just because the bard wasn't one of those first 8 PHB 1 classes in 4e doesn't mean the other new options in the PHB2 don't exist.

The 4th and 5th books would be PHB2 and MM2. If we are talking those books we would get 16 races and 16 classes so you have disputed my "same amount of options" argument. Fair enough.

Back to my original point, why weren't those options included in PHB1 and those levels set to 10 or so instead of up to level 30?

 

[garyh]

The 4th and 5th books would be PHB2 and MM2. If we are talking those books we would get 16 races and 16 classes so you have disputed my "same amount of options" argument. Fair enough.

Back to my original point, why weren't those options included in PHB1 and those levels set to 10 or so instead of up to level 30?

Because it's a bad business model. And if you thought the "4e is incomplete" cries were loud now, imagine if they really did literally only give us 1/3rd of the levels in the first core set.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Because it's a bad business model. And if you thought the "4e is incomplete" cries were loud now, imagine if they really did literally only give us 1/3rd of the levels in the first core set.

3E proved that including everything seen as "iconic" in the first release was a bad business model. In order to get the sales on follow up core products, certain iconic elements must be rationed throughout the other releases.
This way, you have 3-4 of each type of book as "core" product with elements that are seen as more essential to a greater number of players.

Its also the perfect set-up for a 5E model based on a thin rulebook, minis and cards. Look- no more lugging around tons of rulebooks! The same people who loved 3E, and now hate it, and currently love the 4E distribution model will be the 1st to say " Yeah!! lets get rid of all those heavy books".

Gotta love planned product life cycles.

 

[I'm A Banana]

3E proved that including everything seen as "iconic" in the first release was a bad business model.

How?

Why?

What?

(also where and when, but I'll wait for you to explain those first. )

 

[benjamin]

Fear and trepidation

This is soooo interesting!

The guy who is currently DMing our campaign just announced that he will be buying up the 4E books. I had this pang of terror, because I have read so much bad stuff about it... but then I have read heaps of people defending it too...

It seems like there will be no way of actually finding out whether it sux or not other than just playing it.

But then doesn't good Dnd depend on talent, creativity, good role playing, friends, Coke and so many things other than the system...?!?

So maybe if my group is good now... it will continue to be better!?!

I guess I'm about to find out!

Ben

******************************
Want incredibly atmospheric background
soundscapes for your gaming table?
Go to: www.syrinscape.com
New version just released!

Download for free!
See a program demo, and listen to mp3s
of Syrinscape in action.
******************************

 

[ExploderWizard]

How?

Why?

What?

(also where and when, but I'll wait for you to explain those first. )

Well, do you think sales of the PHB 2 would have been less, the same, or greater if the Druid, Bard,Barbarian, and Monk were held back and included with it?

 

[Jasperak]

Because it's a bad business model. And if you thought the "4e is incomplete" cries were loud now, imagine if they really did literally only give us 1/3rd of the levels in the first core set.

I agree, there would be cries of incomplete either way.

In my opinion it is a bad game design model. This way leads us straight down the path of rules bloat. The first eight classes are relatively balanced with each other. I don't think it likely that the next eight classes are going to be balanced with the first eight, and absolutely cannot see the next eight classes two years down the line being balanced with the first set. It would have been better to have all classes balanced at each level or tier instead of by book.

If there is a game system out there that has anywhere near the expected production (doubling its initial character options every year) and has remained balanced over the course of years let me know. No snark intended. I haven't played many other systems.

D&D has shown bloat in every other edition as more books and rules came out. First edition had Unearthed Arcana. Second edition had the Complete Handbook of Elves (most kits > core), Faiths & Avatars, and Player's Options. Third Edition had Tome of Battle. All of these books added new rules and created characters that were more powerful than the core. BECMI did not have this bloat.

I am disappointed because I like the idea of the different tiers. I just think their execution will fail where BECMI succeeded.