D&D 4E Not going to 4e

[GameOgre]

I just wanted you guys to know that many of the 4E crowd do have sympathy with your situation. Many of us hated 3.0 even to the point of not playing it ever and sticking with old editions for years or leaving D&D.

I have never played 3.5 and am thrilled at what I hear about 4E but that doesnt mean I dont see where you guys are coming from about some of your issues.

I just wanted to let you guys know that as some seem to think its a us or them thing and for most gamers I think its not.

 

[mhensley]

Even more, they're going after the fraction of RPG gamers who didn't like D&D at all -- including those who turned away long before 3E.

If you were running the company, which market segment would you try to market to?

 

[Odhanan]

If you were running the company, which market segment would you try to market to?

There's a concept in marketing called the "consumer base". If you screw too much with this one while trying to appeal to everyone who isn't part of it, you're taking a risk that your marketing appeals to neither.

It's not about numbers. It's about what can appeal to whom, exactly.

 

[Odhanan]

For me, that change is one of my biggest reasons for not playing 4E. It is a deal-breaker change. There were DOZENS of other systems I could have played for the past 23 years, none of which had Vancian spellcasting. If I didn't want to play such systems then, why would I want to play one now?

I so completely agree. Seriously.

 

[SteveC]

"This I think is the entire problem. 4e seems to be D&D made by people who don't like D&D. And made for people who don't like D&D."

"That observation is worthy of being added as a signature."


If I worked at WotC as a game designer, and someone pointed out that post to me, and all the posts in agreement with it... I would be hard pressed to get out bed and go to work the next day.

I sometimes wonder if someone who would seriously say this has liked D&D for a long time. The people who are making 4th edition are the same people who have been working on 3X for years now. Monte, Sean and Skip haven't been at the core of D&D work in years: the people who came after them are running things now...and they have been for some time.

If they understand how to make 3X products, what would make one think they forgot all about what made the game great when they decided to design 4E?

I have a lot of sympathy for those of you who aren't going to 4E because I don't like some of the things about it either. I like the people who are working on it, as much as you can like people you know through a message board alone, so I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. If you're on the other side of that equation that's fine: there's room for all of us in gaming, but let's keep the hyperbole down a little bit if we can?

--Steve

 

[Wolfspider]

If they understand how to make 3X products, what would make one think they forgot all about what made the game great when they decided to design 4E?

If the game is so great to begin with, why would they make all of these rather odd changes when designing 4e?

 

[broghammerj]

I sometimes wonder if someone who would seriously say this has liked D&D for a long time. The people who are making 4th edition are the same people who have been working on 3X for years now. Monte, Sean and Skip haven't been at the core of D&D work in years: the people who came after them are running things now...and they have been for some time.

Maybe that's why I stopped buying 3.5 products Anyways, I would agree it's pretty bad to insinuate that those working for WotC don't love DnD.

 

[LostSoul]

"This I think is the entire problem. 4e seems to be D&D made by people who don't like D&D. And made for people who don't like D&D."

"That observation is worthy of being added as a signature."

I mean, are ENposters really advocating that the 4e WotC designers "don't like DnD"? Seriously?

If you read it charitably, you can come up with somthing else.

D&D means a lot of different things to different people. What D&D is to me might not be what D&D is to you, or Joey Joe Joe Joey Joerson in the corner over there.

Maybe when people say, 'The designers don't like D&D', maybe they mean, 'They don't seem to like the things about D&D that I do.'

Which is fair.

To me, D&D is two things:
1. Going into dangerous dungeons, fighting strange monsters, overcoming crazy traps, and getting wierd treasures.
2. Making tactical choices (and, less often, strategic ones).

To me, D&D isn't about simulating the life of a knight in a world full of magic and danger, nor emulating fantasy fiction, nor weaving a story about a Warlock trying to redeem himself. But if that was what D&D meant to me, I can see why I might think 'The designers don't like D&D.'

 

[Umbran]

OK then....

He has a point. Folks here seem to feel that they have a right to define what is and is not D&D for others. Apparently, even the people who hold the license to the property aren't allowed to do that (by changing the system), but they themselves are. Bit of hubris, that. And kinda rude to claim that they know what these designers do and don't like. As if they can read minds.

What really ought to be said is something more like, "4e seems to be designed by folks who don't like what I like in D&D, for people who don't like what I like in D&D."

 

[JRRNeiklot]

I'm not saying 4e will be a bad game. It may be a wonderful game. But with all the changes they've made, it won't be D&D. I'm not a huge fan of 3e, but it's still recognizably D&D. 4e is throwing all the D&Disms out with the bath water. Sure, it's got the name D&D, but if I were to suddenly get rich and buy the rights to D&D and wiffle ball and name the latter D&D it still wouldn't be D&D, even though wiffle ball is a hell of a fun game.