non switchers: what can wotc do to win you back?

[gribble]

This is gonna sound a bit weird, but my answer is:

Get rid of D&D Insider (or at least the compendium and character builder).

It's not that I don't like it, in fact it's the opposite. It's so good and useful that I just don't need the books anymore.

Not that I've bought every 4e book released, but I've certainly picked up the big ones - PHB2, Adventurers Vault, the "X Power" books, etc. I was planning on picking up AV2, but realised that I don't really need it. The compendium & character builder will have everything I need from it. Same with Martial Power 2, and I'm even beginning to think it'll be the same with PHB3 - apparently by the time it releases I'll have over half of the content already anyway as a D&D Insider!

I'm not complaining, but I certainly have been buying a lot less from WotC in the last 6 months. The quality of their adventures and fluff so far has been poor, so I don't (nor will I) pick up any of that, except for the Eberron books (which IMO are by far the best books released for 4e). DMG2 is the last book from them I plan to buy this year... with the possible exception of Primal Power, and that's only because I'm a completist and want to have all the PHB 1 & 2 "Power" books on my shelf.

 

[sjmiller]

Well, I seriously doubt that I will be buy any 4e material. I read through it and it just does not interest me. It's not a style of game I like. So, in order for WotC to win me back as a customer they need to do one simple thing: Republish DragonQuest 2nd Edition. If they did this, I would be a happy camper and would buy several copies.

 

[Scurvy_Platypus]

To a certain extent, I don't feel like changing because of the fans. I realize that's a strange reason to some folks, but as a social creature I look at a game and see what kind of folks are playing it. And then I ask myself, "Would I like to play with that person?" If the answer is "No", then it's a mark against the game. If it's just a random person here or there, then that's one thing. But when it's a majority, then yeah, I want nothing to do with the game. That doesn't mean there aren't nice folks associated with the game/playing the game, just... if the only people I see interested in the game are people I don't want to play with, then clearly it's attracting a demographic that doesn't include me.

I also don't think too much of the apparent business of WotC. While they might employ gamers and those gamers might even be passionate about the game, the company doesn't actually seem to care about the game except as a business.

I also have zero interest in the apparent supplement treadmill they'd like me to jump on once again.

DDI? Completely uninterested.

I heard with mild interest that they're bringing back Dark Sun. The sad thing is, I didn't think "Sweet!!! It's about time!!!". No, I thought "Hmmm. 8 years of fans asking for it and they can't be bothered. New edition out and still a fair amount of grumbling and unhappiness and folks loudly refusing to move on, and all of a sudden they're talking about bringing back an old setting." I find it difficult to believe that's a coincidence and not just an attempt to entice holdouts to switch.

And then of course there's the whole GSL/OGL thing which _really_ leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

 

[Jack7]

I haven't had a lot of time lately, so forgive me if I reiterate what someone else has said. Due to time constraints I've read some of the responses, but not all.

To me personally I've never really played a corporate version of D&D. Even when I played AD&D, my favorite version of the game, I easily incorporated and adapted anything from any other source material I liked to create the setting and game I and my players desired. I was never a stickler for rules, format, or version, in that regard. So 4E was no different in that regard. I bought the books to mine for material and things I liked (in this case mainly to make the non-human characters very different from the human characters, class or profession wise), and disregarded the rest.

I don't play or use pure or absolute versions of anything. If I want to improve my car, I make modifications to it. If I want to improve my computer, or add ancillary equipment, or make personal modifications I do so. If I want to make improvements to an aircraft design, I do so. To me the point has never been about version (in this respect, in regards to the D&D game) but about performance (my same concern with practically anything I employ or enjoy).

So in this sense D&D, or WOTC being the contemporary designer and seller, has never lost me entirely. Because I simply take what I consider best about any particular edition of D&D, and as El Mahdi said, of any other game or system and create my own hybrid anyways. So in that sense WOTC never had me. Nor did TSR.

I do however agree with many of the other commentators that WOTC did a poor job of customer satisfaction through a certain arrogance of corporate attitude early on, though that may have improved over time. (I just don't spend a lot of time or money buying secondary material when I know I'm gonna create my own modifications to the game anyway - I just get what I think I need to set me on the right track of experimentation. And maybe, naturally enough, a cooperation doesn't wanna hear that, but I also think that with very little effort they could easily and cheaply exploit the "self-modification market" with very simple design and marketing techniques.)

What personally I objected to most strenuously (if I can justifiably apply that term to gaming) was the subtle sense I got that 4E was presented not as a newer or improved version of the game, but as either a replacement for all previous versions, or was now more or less considering itself "the game itself." Which it ain't, and ain't never gonna be. It's just a version. Like a version of an operating system. An OS, especially a particular version of an OS is not computing in and of itself, it is just an operating system. Nothing more. Merely a given method at a given time of arranging operations, functions , and applications. It is not the thing itself, it is the method of employing the thing itself. 4E is just a version of D&D, good and interesting in some respects, poor and useless to me in others. But no-one is gonna convince me it is fantasy RPGing, or even Dungeons and Dragons in and of itself. Trust me, it will be in its own turn replaced by something else. That's just the way things are.

So I don't mistake cars for all forms of transportation, and I'm never confused by the idea that one car may be superior in one type of performance, and inferior in another, to any other car. Most will be good at something, and all will be less than optimal at something. (Then again, given enough time the car will be replaced as surely as the saddle-horn. It's just a matter of when and how. There is no unchanging island on the ocean of forever.)

Let the best car manufacturer make the best car possible (because they have the time and resources to do that while I'm busy at something I consider more important), and if I want to improve it from there, then I will. But just because I buy a BMW or a Lexus doesn't mean I'm duty bound to be stuck with what I'm got just because that's the best the car manufacturer could, or would, do at that moment. Once I buy the BMW it isn't their car anymore, it's mine to experiment with and improve upon. So I'm not worried about any corporation or anyone else saying, "we don't do it that way, we do it this way." Well, maybe you do. It's not my problem or concern.

I'm only concerned with how does the version perform, and can it be improved upon or augmented or enhanced?

And if there's one thing I've never been afraid of in this world, then it's of finding that thing that cannot be improved upon.

 

[radferth]

I'm pretty sure they don't want to win me back. No hard feelings either way, but the seem to have designed 4e with a certain type of player in mind, and I am a different type. I'd be interested in good adventures (new or old), but those have never been WotC's strong suit. I've got the 4e PH, and I'd happily join a game of it again. (The times I played were fun). But, it doesn't strike me as being very immersive, and I've no desire to keep up with a constantly evolving rule set. It would have been nice if they would either have kept up some level of support of 3.5, or made a more gracious hand-off to the OGL community (my ex-wife was much gentler when she sent me packing), but neither would have gotten them any more of my money. They seem happy serving a certain segment of the game community (it does seem to be the segment that spends more on gaming stuff), and I am happy playing what I play. They wisely will focus future efforts on winning new 4E players, as opposed figuring out what they can sell to non 4E players such as me and most of the rest of us in this thread.

 

[vrock]

Nothing that I can think of.

It isn't that I'm angry with Wizards or am being vindictive, it is just that they are now producing a game that I do not find as enjoyable as 3.5/Pathfinder. I also am not a fan of subscription based services. I may still buy a pack of minis every year or so, but aside from that I do not see any of my money going to them.

This.

I started playing D&D in 2nd edition, with some bits and pieces of 1st edition depending on the group I was playing with. 3rd edition rules felt like a natural evolution of previous editions. Some things added, some rules cleaned up, and nice unified system, and 3rd party support. Our group dove in, it felt like the changes were things we were already trying to do but couldn't find rules to do them. When 3.5 came along I was glad the OGL existed, I didn't really want to fork out the cash for the new core books for the few rule changes that were included. I bought lots of 3rd party and WOTC supplements during this time, mostly settings and modules.

When 4e was announced I was excited. Some of the previews had bits that I thought were really refreshing. Minions comes to mind. It was something that we had sort of been using in our games, but mostly for things with very few hp vs character average dmg/att. 4e took it to far IMO, like a lot of the other changes that were made.

After borrowing the core books from a friend I decided that it just wasn't a game for me. I know I'm going to get flak for this, but it felt like an MMO. Pushing, pulling, shifting, everything has an effect now, and honestly it all feels like the same effect. Too much balance, not enough variety. Sometimes I enjoy playing or DMing for a less than optimized or balanced party. It feels like the game is forcing characters to specialize in one particular role, instead of allowing them to fit whatever concept the player may want for them.

If asked to play in a 4e game, I'd probably play, but I have no desire to buy the books. I guess that could change after playing, but from hearing stories from friends in 4e campaigns I doubt that would be the case.

 

[billd91]

Publish a game that interests me.

That's a pretty important requirement. For me, they actually do publish one - SWSE. So I am a WotC customer... for one product line and that's it. And even then, there are things I'd prefer they did better (PDFs particularly).

 

[Voadam]

So, based on the poll results, the one thing that is most likely to get people to play 4e is if you offer them the ability to purchase a $25 PDF vs. paying $25 for an actual book? That's it? That's the primary beef? Given that a) PDFs kind of suck, and b) this issue didn't come up at all until almost a year after 4e came out, this seems like a really lame rational. If you don't like the system that's fine, but this is a really bad excuse for not playing it.

Nah not to play 4e but to be a customer.

I play 3e. I didn't buy 3e WotC pdfs as they were super expensive (full cover price) and I had other options I preferred to spend my money on.

30% off 4e pdfs were too expensive for my tastes and I didn't buy them.

I was however a regular customer of WotC buying four $5 old edition pdfs every month up until March.

Then they stopped selling pdfs at all.

If WotC reinstated the pdfs according to their old model (cheap old ones, full price 3e and 30% off 4e) I'd get old ones again.

If they sold cheap 4e pdfs I'd probably get them and try out the system and get interesting sourcebooks.

If they made 4e OGL such that there was an srd of the rules enough to learn the system and play I'd check out the system. I have the quickstart and shadowkeep pdfs which are good starts but I haven't been inspired enough to go through them in depth to see how much I can play or DM from just those.

 

[Wombat]

Wombat's History, Redux...

So, I came to OD&D ... then left about the time "1st ed" AD&D came out because I found RuneQuest (amongst other games); I found I preferred a game that didn't have alignment, character classes, simple hit points, and a game that did allow for skills and a lot of character individualization. I played D&D a few times, but things like THAC0 turned me off immeasurably -- I wanted to move away from a game that centered on combat.

So I played very few games of D&D from about 1979 until 2000, when I came back with 3e. I came back for two reasons. First, I was having a hard time after a move creating a new gaming group and it is always easy to find people who are willing to play D&D and many who are nervous to try non-D&D. Second, I had heard that the new edition had opened up the game, that it had removed many of my issues with D&D. And when I got the core books as a Christmas present from a buddy, well, it was easy enough to do.

And I found that 3e was far better than my memories of earlier editions ... but still had limitations, such as alignment, hit points, and the like. However, the ability to utterly customize character classes was a huge plus in my mind. No, I didn't like the "mini-centric" feel of the game (by this point I had moved away from combat being the central issue of any given session, much less multiple-combat sessions), but with a some judicious tweaking (& and lot of input from 3rd party publishers -- I found I preferred 3rd party books to WotC books quite regularly) I was able to bring 3.whatever D&D into a shape that fit my conception of what rpgs should be about.

When I read 4e, I was puzzled; while there appeared to be more choices for each character class, I soon realized that there were actually fewer, in that once you made a step along a given path, almost all the other options snapped shut. And the "mini-centric" feel became even more pronounced in the writing. I played 4 sessions and liked it even less. It felt like combat was pretty much the only important aspect of the game ... and that turned me off massively. Every power, ever position, every "role", every spell was focused entirely on what it would do in or for combat, that or of such minor importance that it was relegated to a position of embarrassment. Still, if I found no game group other than folks who would play D&D, I would play; I am a gamer -- ludo, ergo sum.

So ... will I come back to D&D? Sure, it is possible, quite possible. There have been massive changes between the various editions of D&D; it is quite possible that a future edition will move towards aspects of gaming that I like and away from the ones I am less fond of. I will not give up on that notion any more than I will give up on games.

 

[Ahzad]

Technically, "non-switchers" probably still play D&D, it just happens to be 3.XE, or an early edition and many probably still buy Dungeon Tiles, Miniatures and maybe the occasional setting book or adventure to convert.

I used to play 4e but the above quote pretty much describes me as a WotC customer. I played 4e my group did and some of us really liked it, but some like me gradually became less enamored with it until I had really no more desire to run the game. I still buy dungeon tiles, minis and the the occasional module to convert, but for me I'm done with WotC D&D. Being a huge fan of Crafty Games Spycraft system I was exicted that FantasyCraft was finally released, and I've been following it's development for a long time, and picked up the pdf, and got a print copy and now it's the D&D game for me and my group. It's rules are what I want to play with and what I enjoy. Otherwise it was going to be a 3.x system with Monte's Book of Experimental Might as it's core. It's just a matter of personal taste and choice.