Pramas: Does 4E have staying power?

[Imaro]

One of the things I think 4e has going for it in terms of "broken" vrs "Not broken" is since most of the powers and abilities of a given class come in the form of the "powers" selected, it's much easier to repair classes that are discovered to have gotten the shaft.

If we find out say, the Warlock powers just aren't up to snuff, they can later use this collected data to release a new host of powers that bring the warlock more in line with the other classes. By doing so the warlock still continues to be a valid class throughout the life of the game.

Yep, that could be the case...as long as your willing to subscribe to DDI to get em.

 

[Scribble]

This is incorrect. Page 62 of the PHB:

"You must choose a deity compatible with your alignment: Good clerics serve good deities, lawful good clerics serve lawful good deities, and so on."

So, 4e Clerics actually have less alignment freedom than do 3e Clerics.

Sorry I mispoke about that. Yep if you choose to make yourself an alignment then your deity must match. 4e clerics, however, have the "unaligned" option. If you choose to be unaligned you can worship who or whatever you want.

Also since your powers come from being made a cleric, and not the divine being itself, you can use them in any fashion you wish. Again you can be a fallen cleric using powers of a "good" god for evil.

 

[delericho]

Yep, that could be the case...as long as your willing to subscribe to DDI to get em.

Well, that or pick up "Arcane Power X", or whatever the equivalent book is called. Really, I don't see how that's any different from previous editions.

Except that 4e is heavily discussed online, and new powers will no doubt become available here and on other boards. In that regard, 4e is in a stronger position than any prior edition except 3.X.

(And, the powers structure does give it an advantage over even 3.X. For that edition, spellcasters could be patched with new spells, and the Fighter with feats, but a similar patch for the Monk or the Rogue would be extremely hard to implement.)

 

[delericho]

Yep if you choose to make yourself an alignment then your deity must match. 4e clerics, however, have the "unaligned" option. If you choose to be unaligned you can worship who or whatever you want.

Indeed. Oddly, 4e Paladins don't have the same option - Unaligned paladins can only serve Unaligned deities, and Unaligned deities will only accept Unaligned paladins.

(This means Paladins also have more alignment options than has ever previously been the case. Sadly, I was massively in favour of LG-only Paladins, even at the expense of losing them as a base class. Still, I can accept that I was very much in the minority there - it's probably a strength, rather than a weakness of 4e that Paladins can be of any alignment.)

 

[The Little Raven]

There is no mechanical enforcement on cleric or paladin alignment, so a paladin or cleric can change alignment and not lose his powers, since the deity no longer directly grants them. That's the scariest thing about heretics and apostates.

 

[Aberzanzorax]

Interestingly, the Amazon sales ranks of the Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide and the 3.5 Player's Handbook are almost the same.

Right now:
Player's Handbook is 34,361 (leading by 1,637)
Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide is 35,998

I know it is apples to oranges in a sense (core versus supplement)...but they're both today's figures.

Given:

The ranking does not depend upon the actual number of books sold, but rather, on a comparison against the sales figures of the other 9,999 books within that same hour. Simultaneously, a trending calculation is applied to arrive at a computerized sales trajectory. So, hypothetically, a book that held a ranking of 2,000 at 2pm and 3,000 at 3pm, might hold a 4,000 ranking at 4pm, even if it actually sold MORE books between 3-4 than it did between 2-3.
Books with rankings between 10,000 and 100,000 are recalculated once a day, rather than once an hour. Current projections, as well as historic sales information play a key role in these calculations. In fact, the predictive nature of the Amazon ranking system is what makes it possible for a newly-released book to outrank an older established title, even though the actual sales figures for the latter far exceed the former.

(from this site: Navigating the Amazon Sales Ranking | WebProNews)

So assuming that 3.5 has been dead for a while now, shouldn't we expect recent sales to indicate that one of the major recent supplements was doing a bit better than the 3.5 player handbook?

 

[I'm A Banana]

I find your view on this interesting... Because it's just seems like such a different way to think about things then I tend to...

You seem to see it as if WoTC was somehow able to force us to buy more products.

Of course not. That would be patently silly. You seem to think I am a gibbering idiot. That I imagine Mike Mearls sitting in his dark tower on his throne of bones from those who have been layed off, petting his cat, and laughing evilly as his Mind Control Helmet sparks with black lightning.

I'm not an idiot and WotC can't control our minds.

What WotC can do is tap into the collector's mindset. It's an advertising technique: by buying more things, you will feel better! By buying more books, you will have a more complete game! Without all the books, well, you aren't having ALL THE FUN, are you?! I guess in as much as any advertising/marketing technique is mind control, this is, but it's hardly maniacal or consistent.

Not everyone has a collector's mindset, but I'd wager there are a lot of gamers that are susceptible to it (do you own more D&D supplements right now than you've ever used at the table? CONGRATULATIONS, YOU'RE A COLLECTOR!). It's not inherently bad, and it's not inherently evil to try and capitalize on it (indeed, it's a little silly to NOT try to capitalize on it), but if you capitalize on it, it can reach a breaking point.

Heck, this was part of the reason 2e is decried: so many people felt their games were incomplete without the different rules references hidden in various 2e books. "Argh! This book mentions a supplement I don't have! So useless!"

That's why 3e's decision to blatantly NOT do that was so refreshing, even if they moved away from it a bit at the end.

Whereas I fall into the category of feeling WoTC is attempting to supply the demand of its fan base.

I never said they weren't trying to do that. I just said they were tapping into the collector's mindset as an attempt to get people to buy more books. It's pretty unrelated.

Players want an online database of the rules elements. WoTC attempts to supply that.

I think 3e was chugging along just fine with the SRD and sites like d20SRD.com. Totally legal, totally awesome sites. Totally things that WotC kicked to the curb in favor of the fee-based DDI. "Ah! They're giving away things we could charge for! Gotta stop that!"

The big thing about it is that it is for completists. If you want all the rules in a convenient index, give us $6 (per month), or else no, you can't have that. You can game without it. But, you know, you don't have have EVERYTHING then.

Players want minis. WoTC attempts to supply that.

Hard-wiring minis into the game and giving them minis-exclusive powers isn't responding to "players want minis." It's responding to "how can we sell more minis?" You can produce and sell little pieces of plastic without dipping into the "Gotta Catch 'em All!"

Players want new suppliments for their game. WoTC attempts to supply that.

By calling them "core," they are tapping into that collector's mindset. "All these books are essential for REAL D&D! If you play D&D without them, you're playing some sort of jury-rigged, half-arsed D&D that obviously isn't up to snuff with our Platinum Edition Insider All Core Books Exclusive Membership. And you don't have $30 this month? Aww..."

I mean, those are pretty cartoonish hyperbole, and I don't think WotC is literally saying any of that, but to someone who has a collector's mindset, who wants to have a "complete" game or nothing, each additional purchase is a burden, so if there are going to be a lot of additional purchases needed to complete the game, they'll just go do something else.

One big thing I think we're seeing is that YES 4e was designed with not just the thought that there might be suppliments, but the knowledge that players WANT and expect them. (And they want and expect them on a regular basis.) So the game needs to be designed with that idea in mind. The game needs to be able to have new material add to it and change it, without that new material causing the original system to break down.

New material is all well and good, but by making new material required (even just by implication and branding) you trigger that collector's mindset, which says "I need everything that is required." If they can't GET everything that is required, they'll just abandon the whole thing.

This made me smile... It sounds like something you hear people say about drugs and alchohol. "I don't need to drink to have fun!"

If you do need to drink to have fun, I don't think I'm the one with the problem.

 

[Scribble]

Of course not. That would be patently silly. You seem to think I am a gibbering idiot. That I imagine Mike Mearls sitting in his dark tower on his throne of bones from those who have been layed off, petting his cat, and laughing evilly as his Mind Control Helmet sparks with black lightning.

I'm not an idiot and WotC can't control our minds.

Please don't accuse me of doing something I never did. Never once did I call you an idiot or even mean to imply it.

I'm pointing out a different way we view things, nothing more.

What WotC can do is tap into the collector's mindset. It's an advertising technique: by buying more things, you will feel better! By buying more books, you will have a more complete game! Without all the books, well, you aren't having ALL THE FUN, are you?! I guess in as much as any advertising/marketing technique is mind control, this is, but it's hardly maniacal or consistent.

And I'll point to it again.

You seem to view it as, WoTC feels if they make a game collectible, people will want to collect it.

Wheas I see people already wanted to collect things for their game.

We want source books, we want extra options, we want new feats powers, spells. Wizards is simply supplying that demand.

That's why 3e's decision to blatantly NOT do that was so refreshing, even if they moved away from it a bit at the end.

3e added expansion suppliments from the very begining. How exactly did it move away from this?

I think 3e was chugging along just fine with the SRD and sites like d20SRD.com. Totally legal, totally awesome sites. Totally things that WotC kicked to the curb in favor of the fee-based DDI. "Ah! They're giving away things we could charge for! Gotta stop that!"

Again, it interests me. You feel WoTC was motivated by seeing others giving away their stuff for free...

I feel they were motivated by seeing how popular the digital tools were, and wanting to offer digital tools. Yes, to make money, which is what businesses do.

The big thing about it is that it is for completists. If you want all the rules in a convenient index, give us $6 (per month), or else no, you can't have that. You can game without it. But, you know, you don't have have EVERYTHING then.

I've never once had a "complete" set of game books, even in my heyday of buying books. The DDI is still great for me, not so I can "catch em all" but because it makes adventure prep 10x easier for me.

Hard-wiring minis into the game and giving them minis-exclusive powers isn't responding to "players want minis." It's responding to "how can we sell more minis?" You can produce and sell little pieces of plastic without dipping into the "Gotta Catch 'em All!"

Again we come from a difefrent perspective on this.

Sure you can sell little plastic minis... Offer extra stuff with those little plastic minis and their more attractive... What's wrong with that?

People want minis. People want minis more when they have bonus stuff in them.

By calling them "core," they are tapping into that collector's mindset. "All these books are essential for REAL D&D! If you play D&D without them, you're playing some sort of jury-rigged, half-arsed D&D that obviously isn't up to snuff with our Platinum Edition Insider All Core Books Exclusive Membership. And you don't have $30 this month? Aww..."

I mean, those are pretty cartoonish hyperbole, and I don't think WotC is literally saying any of that, but to someone who has a collector's mindset, who wants to have a "complete" game or nothing, each additional purchase is a burden, so if there are going to be a lot of additional purchases needed to complete the game, they'll just go do something else.

I've collected various things over the years. Anytime I collected things, it was because it was something I liked. It was never a "burden." I wanted the things, so I colelcted them. This argument seems very strange to me.

People also collect D&D books even when they're not listed as "core." have you seen the number of people happy they can "complete" their set chea[ply now that 3e stuff has gone on sale in most places???

New material is all well and good, but by making new material required (even just by implication and branding) you trigger that collector's mindset, which says "I need everything that is required." If they can't GET everything that is required, they'll just abandon the whole thing.

Core and required are different things.

If you do need to drink to have fun, I don't think I'm the one with the problem.

It's just a similar statement I've heard people say regarding substances. Just made me smile to see D&D as an addictive substance.

 

[Scribble]

If I wasn't at work... I'd drink to that...LOL, You and me both.

Funny how that happens eh?

 

[I'm A Banana]

Let's recap.

You seem to see it as if WoTC was somehow able to force us to buy more products.

I'm not an idiot and WotC can't control our minds.

Please don't accuse me of doing something I never did. Never once did I call you an idiot or even mean to imply it.

I'm pointing out a different way we view things, nothing more.

Later...

You seem to view it as, WoTC feels if they make a game collectible, people will want to collect it.

Please don't accuse me of doing something I never did. Never once did I say WotC thinks that they are creating a collector's mindset or even mean to imply it.

I'm pointing out that they are using a marketing device that has a potential backfire, nothing more.

Wheas I see people already wanted to collect things for their game.

We want source books, we want extra options, we want new feats powers, spells. Wizards is simply supplying that demand.

We want supplements, extra options, new feats, powers, and spells...4e gives us a never-ending Core, minis with powers attached to them, and a GSL designed to make you pay for a WotC-exclusive database. One does not necessarily follow from the others. 3e gave us 3 core books, a well-received system of minis, and a wide open OGL and, by all accounts, did very well.

Wizards is creating a greater demand by tapping into the completist's mindset. They, quite rationally, want 4e to do even better!

I mean, that's the point. That's smart business even. Creating greater demand for products that don't seem to be selling very well means they might sell better, and thus everyone makes more money!

But it does have a potential breaking point. By trying desperately to create greater demand, you can, in fact, flip the switch and create much less demand. If I've gotta catch 'em all, I'll just play something less demanding.

4e is quite obviously trying to drive up demand by increasing the perceived value of these books (calling them "core") and the minis (powers!) and the DDI (the only place you can get a full index of monsters!). It's a good move, but, for some consumers (perhaps many?) it can easily go too far. Once you know that it's impossible for you to complete your collection, you stop collecting all together. If I can never have all the pokemans, why would I even bother leaving Professor Oak's place with my Squirtle? Why pay $70 for an incomplete game that I'll never be able to complete?

That's not a universal thought, but I'd argue that it's stronger than normal amongst gamers (who all own shelves of things they own for pure collecting joy that they never really use).

It's a risky move. It can backfire if pushed too far. It's not even clear that 4e has pushed enough people too far, but it is, by direct anecdote, pushing some people too far.

3e added expansion suppliments from the very begining. How exactly did it move away from this?

There were only ever 3 core books, and, it was implied, you would not NEED to own one supplement to use another. Everything would reference the core, and only the core. You could skip three years' worth of rules and buy a single book in year 4 and with that book and the 3 core books, you would have a complete game. Everything was optional.

4e is trying to remove the "optional" idea in order to drive up sales.

It's not a bad idea, but it can backfire (and it has in a few cases).

I feel they were motivated by seeing how popular the digital tools were, and wanting to offer digital tools. Yes, to make money, which is what businesses do.

d20srd.com DID make WotC money. The SRD that they gave away for free DID make WotC money. In a very indirect fashion, but it DID make WotC money.

They want to make more, which is a pretty good idea, but in order to do that, they took away something, and gave us nothing. Now we're paying for something we used to get for free. That's a pitfall of this. The appearance is of someone giving us a ball to play with and then, once we've been having fun for a while, taking the ball back, showing us an EVEN BETTER ball, and saying "Give me a dollar if you want to rent it."

I've never once had a "complete" set of game books, even in my heyday of buying books. The DDI is still great for me, not so I can "catch em all" but because it makes adventure prep 10x easier for me.

Sure. But it also appeals to the completists because they can get everything without having to buy the books and the minis and the assorted accessories.

People also collect D&D books even when they're not listed as "core." have you seen the number of people happy they can "complete" their set chea[ply now that 3e stuff has gone on sale in most places???

Right. "More Core" just means that there should be more of those people and they will have to buy more things to be "complete," and hopefully before the edition ends. Some people viewed their collection as compelte at 3 books. 4e hates that idea.

Sure you can sell little plastic minis... Offer extra stuff with those little plastic minis and their more attractive... What's wrong with that?

People want minis. People want minis more when they have bonus stuff in them.

Nothing is wrong with WotC wanting to make people want minis more.

But it can backfire when people who buy every splatbook learn that they won't have a complete collection without the minis, too, but can't afford that, and so stop buying minis, and even stop buying splatbooks, because if they're going to have to suffer with being incompolete, they don't need them, either.

Core and required are different things.

Hahahaha, I don't think the Coasties would support that view.

It's just a similar statement I've heard people say regarding substances. Just made me smile to see D&D as an addictive substance.

You might be surprised about how far psychological addiction might go in explaining "Cat Piss Men," man.