Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 7026487" data-attributes="member: 82106">It certainly didn't seem like between 2008 and 2014 when 4e was the officially supported version of D&amp;D that there was a dearth of new players. I don't know any way to produce evidence one way or another, but certainly I've talked to and experienced many people who joined the game during 4e and when I got people into my games that were new they didn't seem to have trouble with 4e in any way that was different from grokking 2e for instance. So its a question perhaps, but it wouldn't, IMHO be warranted to assume that 5e somehow has proven to be a vastly superior entre to D&amp;D. I really tend to think, as has been discussed up thread, that 4e simply fell into a point in the market cycle and economic cycle where the release of a new D&amp;D, and certainly one that didn't cater at all to the then-popular OSR trend, was simply disfavored. I suspect that if 5e had been released in 2008 we'd be looking at an edition roll over from that now as well. There were other factors that haven't even really been discussed here too, but frankly its rather OT and not terribly relevant anymore. 5e certainly arrived at a time and in a form that was fortuitous and its marketing (or largely lack thereof) was handled without huge missteps. It is a game that is a little backwards-looking, but it provided enough contrast with 4e to let people unwind a lot of their anti-WotC rhetoric and switch from PF back to 'true' D&amp;D. That was the goal!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 7026487, member: 82106"] It certainly didn't seem like between 2008 and 2014 when 4e was the officially supported version of D&D that there was a dearth of new players. I don't know any way to produce evidence one way or another, but certainly I've talked to and experienced many people who joined the game during 4e and when I got people into my games that were new they didn't seem to have trouble with 4e in any way that was different from grokking 2e for instance. So its a question perhaps, but it wouldn't, IMHO be warranted to assume that 5e somehow has proven to be a vastly superior entre to D&D. I really tend to think, as has been discussed up thread, that 4e simply fell into a point in the market cycle and economic cycle where the release of a new D&D, and certainly one that didn't cater at all to the then-popular OSR trend, was simply disfavored. I suspect that if 5e had been released in 2008 we'd be looking at an edition roll over from that now as well. There were other factors that haven't even really been discussed here too, but frankly its rather OT and not terribly relevant anymore. 5e certainly arrived at a time and in a form that was fortuitous and its marketing (or largely lack thereof) was handled without huge missteps. It is a game that is a little backwards-looking, but it provided enough contrast with 4e to let people unwind a lot of their anti-WotC rhetoric and switch from PF back to 'true' D&D. That was the goal! [/QUOTE]

Verification