D&D 4E Star Wars Saga Edition as preview of 4e?

[Klaus]

Static numbers for AC feels more like the active (rolling) side failed to succeed, instead of the static (defending) side succeeding in defense. Making them opposed rolls takes away that feeling. It works specially well with smaller groups and solo players.

 

[Plane Sailing]

And, all that having been said, we do have some "Save your own ass" mechanics in the game, including one involving the new destiny mechanics.

hmmm, destiny...

I'm looking forward to finding out more about this. But is it fated?

 

[buzz]

You're not alone.

But you're probably in the minority.

 

[Ry]

But you're probably in the minority.

On what grounds do you say this? Lots of people complain about D&D's complexity.

 

[buzz]

I think what's being done to the Star Wars RPG is to try to make it more like *Star Wars*, to emulate the feel of the movies. I don't think what's being done in this new edition necessarily has anything to do with changes which might be in a (theoretical) new D&D edition.

I have to agree with Sir B here. While I can see some of these changes, if successful, finding their way into future WotC products, I think the idea that this revision's main purpose is a test bed for 4e is misguided. I really doubt that they would use such an expensive and lucrative license for experimentation.

If the changes in SWSE find their way into any RPG, it'll be a possible future revision of d20M. Honestly, I'm more interested in seeing that than 4e.

Regardless, it's really encouraging to see the WotC design teams so focused on revising the game to improve play. It's one of the many reasons I'm happy they are in charge of D&D, and not the TSR of yore.

 

[buzz]

On what grounds do you say this? Lots of people complain about D&D's complexity.

Honestly, I was just being snarky, and did not mean to further derail this thread into a debate about complexity.

That said, sales would indicate that the majority of the fanbase is pretty happy with D&D as-is. The people who want it to be more like [previous edition of choice] or ["lite" system of choice] are vocal, but a minority nonetheless. They are better served by those publishers that can profitably cater to their needs, e.g., C&C, True20, OSRIC, etc.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Honestly, I was just being snarky, and did not mean to further derail this thread into a debate about complexity.

That said, sales would indicate that the majority of the fanbase is pretty happy with D&D as-is. The people who want it to be more like [previous edition of choice] or ["lite" system of choice] are vocal, but a minority nonetheless. They are better served by those publishers that can profitably cater to their needs, e.g., C&C, True20, OSRIC, etc.

And to further derail...

How much of D&D's sales are because it's "official" D&D? Change the game system around a lot and relaunch it and I'd bet initial sales would be higher and then die off to 'normal' levels again as it finds a new audience and the audience that want's 'official' product.

 

[buzz]

How much of D&D's sales are because it's "official" D&D?

It also further muddies the waters if we consider that, if you drop the brand, you increase the likeliness that a) the product won't be carried by major retailers, and 2) even people who might be interested may never notice it due to lack of brand recognition.

I mean, if your point is that D&D product is selling solely because it's got the brand, there may be some truth in that. However, as we saw with 2e, unappealing product does not sell, regardless of how many collector fanboys there are.

I think a key thing to remember is that WotC is probably one of the few (and likely the only) RPG publishers that can afford to do actual market research. 3e was also play-tested longer and by more people than probably any RPG release in history. Not to mention, it gets discussed in public fora by more people, more often, than any other RPG in existence, by a WIDE margin. If there were a majority of the fanbase wanting the game to be anything other than it is, you can bet the farm that WotC would listen and change their product line accordingly.

Thankfully, a number of small publishers have listened to the minority, which, given the size of the D&D fanbase, just happens to be enough people to make it profitable to market a game that suits their needs. C&C is probably proof enough that, while not a majority, the people looking for a simpler game that still provides a D&D-like experience is large enough to warrant courting.

 

[Desdichado]

I have to agree with Sir B here. While I can see some of these changes, if successful, finding their way into future WotC products, I think the idea that this revision's main purpose is a test bed for 4e is misguided. I really doubt that they would use such an expensive and lucrative license for experimentation.

If the changes in SWSE find their way into any RPG, it'll be a possible future revision of d20M. Honestly, I'm more interested in seeing that than 4e.

As an overt testbed for 4e, I agree--I really doubt they're using Star Wars to perform that function explicitly.

HOWEVER, given the basic similarities between the Star Wars and the standard D&D assumptions about reality, what works well for Star Wars will probably work very well for D&D too. And these reported changes are pretty integral and systemic; if they work well, I'd almost be surprised NOT to see them become common in any future editions of a d20 game from WotC.

And I'd also be surprised to see d20 Modern get a new edition. Does it sell well enough to warrant it, I wonder?

 

[buzz]

And I'd also be surprised to see d20 Modern get a new edition. Does it sell well enough to warrant it, I wonder?

Well, there are four d20M books currently in the Amazon Top 100 Gaming category. I check roughly once a week, and that's about par. It may not do as well as WotC's other lines, but it does dang well by any other company's standards.

Ergo, I see a second edition within the realm of possibility, at least.