Is this what you went through with 3rd Edition?

[Khairn]

Where I lived at the time of 3E's launch (Columbus GA) I heard nothing but positive anticipation towards the coming edition. And when I checked out various sites (including this one) I remember more anticipation than dread from the posters.

Today I see a lot of confrontation and division amongst gamers regarding 4E.

I believe that there was more "grassroot" fatigue with AD&D and desire for the changes that 3E brought than we have today. I believe that WotC misjudged the markets demand (hunger ?) for a new edition and we are seeing the fruits of that timing decision with the amount of pro-4E vs anti-4E discussions on this and other sites.

 

[Nahat Anoj]

Yeah, we pretty much went through this all with the change from 2e to 3e. There were lots of people swearing off the game, fearful that WotC was going to make the game more CCG, and so on. Nowadays people are swearing off the game due to the MMO/anime/videogame/boardgame/dumbed-down/overly-complex/whatever reason.

It does seem to me that there is more "change hate" this time around. I don't know if that's because there actually is more hate or I'm just more aware of it. I was only 20-21 during the change to 3e, and I notice that I look at things differently now - no offense to the early 20's set, but my perspective as I approach 30 really is quite a bit different than what I had at 20 (it'll probably be a similar shift in perspective when I reach 40 ).

My personal theory is that, in the past 10 or so years people have really made the web a part of their lives and have frequently expressed their viewpoints. Not only do they have more practice sharing their views, their views also tend to be more hardened. This hardening is accentuated by the fact that modern internet forums allow for quick and easy dissemination of ideas. So I chalk it up to people have more practice expressing and strengthening their viewpoints.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

Let's just say I'm a bit more demanding about what I expect out of D&D.

And certainly you should be if that's the game style that you prefer.

But I haven't seen anything about 4E that prevents us from playing a game more demanding than kicking the tar out of dungeon denizens and robbing their corpses. In fact, some of what we know suggests that 4E will handle those types of games better.

I don't want to start an argument with you or anything, Psion. You've always been one of the posters that has sound, rational, and interesting things to say about the game. I just think that, at this stage, even with all the information we know, we are still vastly dealing with opinion and gut feeling. There are just a lot of variables we don't know. Unless you're playtesting, then you certainly know a lot more than me.

I wasn't on the boards during the 2e->3e switch, but I played 2e for a few years before 3e came out. I gladly made the switch, because the game became a whole lot more intuitive for me. But I had friends who were resistant, that had to be won over, because it was unfamiliar territory for them and they weren't really into changing.

 

[Pbartender]

Playing fantasy heroes and beating the crap out of monsters for sweet stuff?

Damn straight.

Though not all of them would be willing to admit it, that's exactly why me and my players play D&D. Sometimes we interject small amounts of other stuff into the game (and it's so very nice if we could have an edition D&D that could handle such things), but when we want something more than that for longer than one game session, we tend to take a brief vacation from D&D and find another game that does it better.

But we always come back to D&D when we want to Kill Them All And Take Their Stuff.

 

[IanB]

It is pretty much the same. The details are different but the overall 'feel' of the situation is very much the same.

Also, awesome handle, OP.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Just because they're quiet doesn't mean they converted. They aren't hanging around a 3e website in order to complain about 3e doesn't mean there aren't a good number of 2nd edition players out there.

Like probably everyone outside of Hasbro, I only have anecdotal evidence. About a third of the gamers I know are still with 2nd edition. They don't bother with any RPG websites because the websites don't have anything that interests them.

I'm sure the mass of 3.5 players crushes 2nd edition players statistically, but they are still out there even if you don't hear from them. When 4e comes around, there will be even more people splintering off to stay with 3.5. So conversion by everyone isn't guaranteed. However, I do agree that (thankfully) the complaints will die down as many will eventually convert and the rest will just quietly go about their games.

I play 2nd edition again to prepare for 4th edition

 

[FadedC]

There are a lot more people posting to the EN world boards now then we ever had in the 3e days. I'd estimate maybe 10 times as many. This has a huge effect on the tone of the boards as the more people you have the more likely they are to be dominated by extreme opinions. One only has to go look at the official World of Warcraft Boards (or better yet don't) to see what happens when you have too many gamers posting on one forum. Pretty much every change they make there gets 100 posts about how it's horrible and will destroy the game. It's only through the excellent job the moderators do here that these boards remain as civil and mature as they have.

With that said, yeah we pretty much saw all the same complaints about 3e. It was being dumbed down. It was being turned into a video game (this was pre WoW so they complained it was becoming diablo). It just "wasn't D&D" anymore. You should have seen the first 20 or so reviews of the PHB on amazon. About half of them were vicious attacks on how awful it was.

 

[FourthBear]

From my recollection, there was pretty much just as much negative grognardism/positive fanboyisms back at the 3e launch as there is now, if not more so. I do think people forget just how much crap/flamewars were being thrown around back then. It certainly wasn't 90:10 pro-con or anywhere near, IMO. Heck, I think fights about the new initiative system alone took up incredible amounts of net space. And then there was the whole "Evil WotC, taking over from good ol' TSR" stuff, the "what is with this spiky armor and dungeonpunk art!" and the "they're just trying to turn this into Magic: the Gathering RPG!" Tons of accusations of power gaming and pandering to the younger generation. I was definitely the only one in my gaming group who wasn't vehemently opposed to 3e as it came out. Once all the furore died down, the group saw that it wasn't the end of D&D and that many of the problems proposed worked out fine in play.

 

[Morrus]

particularly in the realm of metasetting: what the game is about.

It's weird how people differ. For me, that's the least important thing, to the point of irrelevance. Removal of "christmas tree" magic items and buffs is a mechanical thing, and the sole most important thing to me.

 

[PeterWeller]

Let's just say I'm a bit more demanding about what I expect out of D&D.

What, exactly, are you demanding? More Roleplaying? That all comes from you and your players. The system can't give you that. More Verisimilitude? D&D never had it. It just bandaged over the complete lack of any realism in an incredibly abstract system with a lot of overpowered magics. The end result was broke wizards and clerics and a world, no matter how much 3E tried to make sense of every little thing, that made absolutely no sense.

D&D has always been a game about being heroes and kicking butt. Anything more is something that came from you.