MerricB said:
Actually, I think you'll find that DMs have been specifically taken into account by the 4e design team. A lot of the important systems of 3e that need to be used by DMs (such as NPC and monster creation) were getting far too complicated and unforgiving. Ditto monster abilities. Have a look at some high-level adventures in Dungeon to see how stupidly long the statblocks could get!
Of course a new edition's success will depend on how it manages to convert the DMs over - but I suspect that making the game easier to run and prepare is one of the chief concerns of the 4e design team.
Definitely valid points. But I wonder if this translates to success for 4E. Why couldn't DM's simply get the 4E SRD, or the core, and translate the changes back?
Yeah, they have said conversion is not do-able. But what is it going to boil down to?
Dropping monster ability scores, and with it, ability damage?
Skills and feats?
I guess what I am saying is, if the simplification is essentially dropping systems and details that were added in 3E, so that we have the 1E/2E basics of HD, Thac0/BAB, Dmg, etc, then conversion will still be no big deal, and won't merit more than the SRD, or purchase of 4E core. This means a hybrid 3E/4E campaign; that is, 3E, except with some parts transferred from 4E to simplify and streamline. Essentially a 3E campaign.
The group gets the best of both worlds, and the cost is pretty small, with accordingly small rewards for Hasbro.
And if it is more drastic than that, then yeah, its not going to be convertable really, but that raises a whole different issue. Essentially, how much can it be changed before its just not D&D anymore? The typical answer is D&D is whatever the owner of the company says it is.
The real answer is, D&D is whatever the DM and players say it is. Because this is anecdotal and varied, its very hard to pin down. But from what I have read, the RPG market continues to shrink. If this gradually atrophy is true, I don't see how a 4E that discards what a lot of people consider D&D helps this at all.
The only way I see 4E being a success is if it somehow massively expands the market, bringing in even more completely *new*-new players, something akin to the explosive success AD&D produced. This is necessary to replace the those lost in the switch from 3E to 4E, and I *guarantee* you some will be lost.
Right now, I am just not seeing that, *especially* with the business model being proferred now.
Furthermore, getting new players is almost always dependent on word of mouth. And publicity and so forth.
MerricB said:
Training new DMs? Well, there'll be a new D&D Basic set, which we can hope will help with that. (Despite Gary's protestations, Wizards has had a history of providing help for beginning DMs... just not of the sort that some grognards will accept as help.)
Hmmm, I am curious about this. Please describe. On the software end at least, I thought the 3E support for DMs was nothing short of awful.
Are you referring to the free net stuff?
MerricB said:
Personally, I felt D&D was a lot more "Money Money Money!" during the 2e years. This looks a lot more restrained.
Cheers!
Now this statement is something I completely disagree with. I played through the 2E years, and yeah, some products really were crappy.
But a new PH, MM, DMG every year, (and who knows what else), is a whole new level. To me, the 2E crap products felt more like the designer's fault. TSR was paying them, they were just doing a crappy job because they could get away with it. To me, that speaks to the designer's work ethic more than anything. Yeah, TSR should have exercised closer management.
But I was fooled myself, trusting certain designers who had a proven track record, who in the end produced garbage. That seems to me more like human error than greed.
The thing with the novels, (especially hardback), I can sort of understand. But I look at that as TSR trying to grow an already profitable division, which is just standard business practice. It was a mis-step, and misjudgement by TSR, but the essentially independent nature of novels means it affected my game...not at all.
The release of the "complete" books was very irritating and is probably the best example of TSR's greed to me. And when WotC did the same thing, it was just as unwelcome, but it is apparently business as usual now.
The thing is, even this isn't *that* bad really, since you only need a book relevant to your class.
Anyway, I think that monetizing 4E will only be as successful as our willingness to co-operate with the business model. Disasters like the original DIVX do not augur well for this aspect of the 4E business model IMO.
I'll tell you what I think the real problem for 4E will be.
Not so much the refusers and so forth, though that will be an issue. I think the real problem will be the people who say, "Well, maybe I'll upgrade in a year or two, after so-and-so gives it a shot, etc."
With 3E, the timing, marketing and promotion were such that almost everyone immediately switched, or at least tried it, because of the excitement it generated. I am not seeing that anywhere I go with 4E.
What I personally feel looking at it is: "Ugg, another edition", and an enormous sense of fatigue. Sure, I'll get it eventually. Probably.
