Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6585147" data-attributes="member: 996">The hope was, apparently (according to an insider who pitched it) that it would bring in $100million - 4 or 5 times the revenue of the whole TTRPG at the time, nearly 7 times the size ($15mil) of the whole industry as measured (pretty badly, but it's all we've got) by ICv2 recently.  Anything less than 50 mil was 'failure.'  Even if every existing fan had loved it, it wouldn't have brought in the revenues hoped for.D&D hadn't been cutting edge since 1977.  4e was revolutionary for D&D, but, without the D&D label, would have been unremarkable and not terribly innovative back in 1990. That's the kind of hazy, narrow distinction the Role v Roll set tried to draw in the 90s to hold up 'Troupe Style Storytelling' as 'real' or superior Roleplaying.  Really, though, players inevitably contribute to the narrative, regardless of system or style.  Games that actively encourage that could be called 'collective storytelling' to distinguish them from other RPGs without such conscious emphasis - but, it's an aspect of RP that's always there, regardless of labels. Immersive Illusionism? Quasi-psuedo-simulation?   Thing is, the premier storytelling game, unsurprisingly called  'Storyteller,' would have been as keen to distance itself from any version of D&D, since they're all way over on the other side of its false dichotomy as 'Roll Playing Games.'  4e, perhaps, as a balanced, playable RPG, even more so.  The WWGS Storyteller philosophy was to present a rich setting, and consciously bad rules to force 'troupes' to reach outside the rules and engage in collective storytelling instead of 'just rolling dice' (actually playing a game).  It was a lot of crap then, and remains so, now.  Though, 'collective storytelling' or 'narrative' isn't a bad description of what RPG campaigns accomplish when they go well.  Rather than judgmental labels, think of accurate descriptions.  4e is a class-based Heroic Fantasy Role-playing Game.  It uses a d20 resolution system, and has mechanics that are clear, balanced, and playable.  It covers 30 levels divided into 3 Tiers. It presents players with many character-customization choices at both chargen and level-up (build, features, feats, skills, powers, race, background, theme, PP, ED).  It uses a vague, generic 'points of light' setting in presentation, but has a few books outlining actual settings.   In contrast, AD&D 2e is a class-based Heroic Fantasy RPG.  It uses a mix of d20 (notoriously THAC0), %, and other dice mechanics and matrices for resolution.  It's mechanics are not perfectly clear and balance is tenuous, being strongest at mid levels (~3-9) and tending to favor fighters below that and casters above (and rogues never), but it is playable with a competent DM to resolve any problems that arise.  It covers 20 levels, but is theoretically open-ended.  It gives players few customization choices beyond class at chargen (race, kit), and fewer at level-up (optional NWP), though that varies with class (.   It provides a choice of several richly-developed settings, some fairly typical fantasy worlds, others quite unique - none as vague, generic & undeveloped as 4e's PoL, all better-supported than 4e's few published settings.</blockquote>

Verification