I think to fairly call 4e an outlier, you would need knowledge of the number of players it has compared with at least two other editions.
The term refers to difference in design, not population.
I think to fairly call 4e an outlier, you would need knowledge of the number of players it has compared with at least two other editions.
Anecdotal evidence from people in the industry was that D&D’s playing population numbers were not great under 4E, although the decline was happening some years before under 3.5E too, to be fair.
However, that is not really the point. When my group and I played 4E for the first time back in 2008, the expressed consensus was that it was fine as a game, but it wasn’t D&D. It didn’t feel like the same game we were playing in under 3.5E at the time, nor in any of our previous experiences of D&D before that (or since 5E came out, either). It was different. That is not a value statement, it’s a simple expression of people’s experience. But in terms of it being the ‘odd one out’, then it is an ‘outlier’ of people’s experience of D&D.
The term refers to difference in design, not population.
It's almost in a different genre it's so different, but it will have a lasting impact that shouldn't be misunderstood by anyone looking to know all about D&D today.
The term refers to difference in design, not population.
I think there's some debate on that topic.