D&D 5E Have you moved on yet? Has Wizard's handled this properly?

[pauljathome]

always had a laundry list of things they shared with us that "had to happen" with D&D to make them switch back.
.

Some people had lists of things that were necessary before they'd even consider switching back. I don't remember anybody saying that their lists were sufficient for them to switch back.

And, of course, those lists were all different and frequently contradictory.

6 years ago the D&D brand was huge. With 4th ed being as divisive as it seems to have been and with Pathfinder making the inroads that it has it really, really isn't clear how big a value the brand now has.

I really hope that WOTC isn't just relying on that brand. They'd better come to the table with a whole heck more than "Hey, we have a game that doesn't suck. But its got the BRAND. So you should buy it because, you know, its GOT THE BRAND".

 

[Treebore]

I see a lot of things interesting and that I could like, but I won't know until I see what the final version will look like. Right now I am guessing I will not be switching to Next, but it is far too early for me to say with anything close to certainty.

 

[Bluenose]

3. 5e moving away from 4e and towards older properties is dumb as heck, because the brand isn't in a position to compete with Pathfinder in my opinion. It'll waste a LOT of money to do so and the results won't be good.

It is of course perfectly possible that they are looking at "older properties" without that necessarily being an attempt to make a 3e like game. AD&D and BECM D&D aren't much like 3e, and attempting to appeal to those fans is just as valid as an attempt to get the 3e crowd back. For one thing, that will alienate all the people who despised 3e as a corruption of what D&D was supposed to play like.

This is why 5e will fail. You see a "mishmash of the old" and I see almost nothing from pre 3e save maybe some terminology. All I see is 4e mechanics reworked a bit, maybe mixed with some 3eisms and some old school flavor text.

It's worth noting that 4e fans don't think there's much from 4e in the game, seeing almost nothing in the mechanics that doesn't derive from D20. Not that I disagree with your conclusion re: uniting everyone in dislike for a game that isn't like any of their preferred version, but describing it as 4e mechanics with almost nothing from pre 3e is just as accurate as a "mishmash of the old". People are seeing what they want to see, and I think some are looking for things they didn't like in older editions and claiming that's the "essential nature" of Next.

 

[Nagol]

Not to doubt Mr Mearl's words, but I figure I would be counted amongst that number as I'm still being sent messages about downloading the packages and responding to the survey.

But I am no longer play testing. Basically I don't have a group to play with face to face any more as we moved country.

I wonder if that is true of other people. They are still on the list but not actively playtesting.

If I were to start gaming again at this stage I have been interested by what I have seen of Next. I'm not the target audience of the core of the game. But I am curious enough to check in and see what is happening every now and again, see how things are progressing. When the final product comes out I'll give it a look and see what can be built onto the core and see if it is enough to scratch my itch.

So where I am at is: not excited, but still interested, and definitely not concerned either way.

Heck, I declined the terms for downloading the first packet and I'm still being sent messages.

 

[Kobold Boots]

I would disagree with this.

There has been one overwhelming truth we have seen these past four years here on the EN World boards. A very large number of players who were pissed off about what was done to make 4E and who ended staying with 3.5 or moved to PF... always had a laundry list of things they shared with us that "had to happen" with D&D to make them switch back.

That told us all we needed to know. Most of them wanted to play 'D&D' but couldn't because of all the problems they had with the 4E system. But given the chance, they'd come running back once WotC got the system in order. The brand holds that much sway over us. 'D&D' is preferable over 'Pathfinder' for a good number of those players, if both games are comparable enough to get the gaming experience out of it that they want.

Never underestimate the power of the brand.

Certainly disagree. Where there's opinion there's tons of options for truth.

I'll reply with the following and leave things at this:

1. The brand was not powerful enough to keep their entire customer base happy when the product changed. This alone speaks to the close correlation between product and brand. I would never underestimate the power of the phrase D&D over the phrase Pathfinder, but the fact that there's discontent in the first place and lowered sales means that the brand can't overcome silly management based on its own merit.

2. What the brand needs is a strong product whose IP is protected. Time and time again, with good product and good marketing in place we've seen successful outcomes. You can't build future success by going backwards. Sometimes you just have to own your mistakes, take inventory of what you have and forge ahead. In my opinion, this is what Hasbro needs to do. If they must make a fifth edition, they're in a stronger position with their existing 4th edition product than they are if they dilute it with older concepts.

3. Last, I'd be careful not to directly correlate vocal complaining about 4th edition with sales of 5th should changes be made. You have what you have and you are what you are in business. There's absolutely no guarantee that fifth edition in pandering to the complainers will sell more product.

However, there's an absolute guarantee that they will:
a. dilute their existing product
b. still need to deal with Pathfinder, which is awesome.
c. have to expect that the complainers will buy a product that's similar to one they already have.
d. presume that the complainers are even playing the game in the first place.

Some of this is safer to presume than others.

One thing I would feel safer assuming than all of this is that real, successful executives that know what they're doing, aren't working for a family game company. Respect meant where appropriate to Hasbro and WoTC.

 

[S'mon]

*shrug*. It seems a good enough game to me. And it sure sold like hotcakes.

I am pretty sure nobody at WotC is so ill-informed to think their forums will be filled with anything other than harping. Happy people generally don't spend much effort to go out to the internet to proclaim it to the world. So forum discussion is dominated by folks who have reason to be unhappy, and the folks who just get glee out of being dissatisfied and negative.

Try browsing the Paizo forums. Nearly all the comment is positive!

Forum nerdrage and negativity is not inevitable.

 

[DaveMage]

According to Mike Mearls, the number of playtesters is steadily increasing. So much for moving on

Um, it would be impossible for the number of playtesters to go down (once anyone has done so, they can be considered a playtester), so saying the number of playtersters is increasing really isn't saying much.

Heck, one could also say the number of 4E (or 1E) products purchased continues to rise!

 

[S'mon]

One thing I would feel safer assuming than all of this is that real, successful executives that know what they're doing, aren't working for a family game company. Respect meant where appropriate to Hasbro and WoTC.

The D&D IP has been hugely mismanaged IMO - I don't think it follows that Hasbro execs are incompetent in general, though. Even within the WoTC division, they may be fine with CCGs, they just don't seem to understand the RPG market.

Competent, professional executives within the RPG industry are obviously very rare. There's Lisa Stevens, and... ...that's about it.

 

[herrozerro]

Um, it would be impossible for the number of playtesters to go down (once anyone has done so, they can be considered a playtester), so saying the number of playtersters is increasing really isn't saying much.

Heck, one could also say the number of 4E (or 1E) products purchased continues to rise!

Yes, but playtesters, especially those who actually fill out the surveys can be measured. yes, if downloads continue to rise it doenst mean much, but if the number of people providing feedback continues to rise it means something.

 

[JeffB]

AFAIC, nothing to move on from really. NEXT is a constantly fluctuating playtest subset of a unfinished rules manuscript. I see cool things, I see dead people. I could never make a final decision based on the mess it currently is.

I do not think their goals are obtainable, despite what seems to be genuine goodwill to the entire D&D community. I also think between the OGL giving your competition your biggest asset, revising it too soon and pissing off publisher and fan alike, dropping a sucessfull game like 3.x, offering a radical alternative (good game it may be, I dig it) alienating more fans by not taking into account that DnD is SERIOUS BIZZNEZZ for alot of us DnD nerds ( I thought the ads and cartoons were funny, oh well), and having a huge chunk of your fanbase go over to the company you used to license to,are the nails in the coffin. The game is not dead by any means, but cannot be all things to all people, thedesign team has absolutely no clue what is important to the OSR/Grog crowd, and as long as WOTC remains driven to any extent by a large megacorp who has far more profitable properties rather than a private company who is making a living off their love of the game, D&D will never regain is status of the fad era or the early d20 boom. They have continued to screw the pooch since 2002ish, and it parallels in many ways TSR's demise under Mrs. Williams.

My 2 lunars.