D&D 4E The Business of 4ed Part I: The Problem

[Henry]

And I really have an issue with this rude, thug - like approach of "you are an old fogey, and if you shut up maybe we'll let you play with us genereously OUR game, because what you think, feel, or say does not matter".

Actually, there's been another rude approach, by a few in the community at large, which has been, "If I yell loud enough, this 4th edition will go away, or change to what I want" - neither of which are happening, from what I can see.

Because the problem, as I read the threads on this fine board, is that you want us to shut up and adopt the new game blindly so that we keep spending on YOUR new game which we do not want to use. Do you think it's Christmas now ?

I'm not Cadfan, but I'm not reading that in his responses - what I'm reading is that people who don't accept that they aren't the sole determiner in what happens to the future of the game they're currently playing always wind up hurting their cause more than helping it, and come off as very rude and obnoxious to others who DO like the changes. (Not singling anyone out, and not saying I like all the changes either - but I do recognize that if it is no longer the game for me, I have plenty of 3E material to occupy my time forever after).

If D&D has gone on for such a long time, it's mainly because us grognards DMs have invested time and MONEY to keep the line alive. Since we do not need us anymore, it is quite acceptable for us to stop spending as well. I highly doubt the "new generation" is willing to spend as much as we do, or spend the same amount of time DMing.

Fortunately, I have no shortage of players, so I don't have to stop gaming at all for many years.

I do hope that WotC manages to attract the majority of good DMs with 4E, as it will make it easier - but I also don't doubt that if WotC manages to attract even one third of the kind of numbers that more popular ventures like MMORPGs have attracted, that the bean counters will be some happy campers. Who knows? They might perform that perfect magic trick, and grab some of the old AND a new crowd - but if not, I don't worry that their future is in doubt even with a new audience, if it's large enough - because all those new players will be new TABLETOP gamers, and to paraphrase Ryan Dancey, "part of the network" then. Once they get tired of 4E, they will want to know what ELSE is out there...

 

[Cadfan]

And I really have an issue with this rude, thug - like approach of "you are an old fogey, and if you shut up maybe we'll let you play with us genereously OUR game, because what you think, feel, or say does not matter".

I've been trying to figure out how to write a response to this that gets across what I think without giving people more excuse to complain about people who are looking forwards to 4e. This is the best I can do.

It genuinely doesn't matter whether you like or don't like the planned obsolescence model. Every gaming company uses it. In the entire world of geek oriented goods and services every single type of geek oriented product uses planned obsolescence, except the board game market. Every single one. Some of them proudly proclaim that they're doing it, and call it part of a vibrant game- these are usually games with the word "collectible" somewhere in their name or description. Others quietly avoid talking about it, but do it anyways.

There are structural causes in the gaming business, and there are causes rooted in player behavior. I could go into those for a while, but its kind of beside the point. The important part is that they're not going away. Games are designed to be experienced as part of a life span. Everyone does it, they're not going to stop, they can't stop, and complaining about it is like cursing the rain.

 

[Daztur]

As far as White Wolf goes I understand that its sales have been dropping as well, a lot of the same stuff that appliesto WotC applies to them.

But all this talk about "what would happen if D&D died??" is a bit pointless. D&D isn't going to die.

Right D&D is too valuable of a liscense to die, however it is very possible that D&D sales shrink to the point that few new products get made and it becomes increasingly difficult to find a gaming group. We're all OK since we have our groups, but I don't think that the D&D side of the WotC is anywhere near OK financially at the moment, which is why they went with 4ed sooner than people expected.

New players are going to evaluate D&D based more on the test of "is it fun?" and "are there people around to play with?" The answer to these questions seems likely to be yes, so 4e will sell just fine.

The second question can be a source of major problems. I didn't play RPGs for 10 years since I didn't have anyone to play with. I'm worried that there will be more of that in the future if WotC doesn't play its cards right.

There's no quit in this group of 3.5ers.

Right but there is a quit in your buying of WotC products. Although there are still plenty of people playing D&D I think that the business end of D&D is in a lot of pain.

Especially since it's happened before.

However overall PnP sales are SIGNIFICANTLY lower now than in the late 90's when 3ed was about to be released. Bit of a different situation now.

 

[Gentlegamer]

Some grognards might not like it, but frankly they don't matter very much. There aren't that many of them, and their much vaunted ability to introduce new players to the game is mostly farcical.

Very dismissive of the 3e grognards . . .

 

[Minicol]

I

It genuinely doesn't matter whether you like or don't like the planned obsolescence model. Every gaming company uses it.

I knew my answer was bound to get an answer.

Yes, I know it does not matter, and I know the game will be success, at least at launch. And no I do not presume that WOTC will change anything to their plans because of me, nor do I really want them to. After all, I found that a lot of their recent products sucked.

To be honest, I would have bought the new edition if only for collecting, but since I have an issue with the behaviour of some 4e fans, I won't. "Our way or no way" is hardly the means to make friends and influence people. But I suspect this attitude goes farther than just on the boards and it extends to the gaming table as well.

I keep hearing that 4e will have nicer rules for instance, which'll be easier to learn. I am willing to believe this. But if I have to stand again two hours of rules discussion in the middle a swordstrike as two rule lawyers argue to no end over the book as they want to see THEIR vision of 4e prevail in the game, I am not interested.

I keep remembering that at a time DRAGON was publishing a lot of stuff like PRCs, and I remember some gamers angrily rebuking the players wanting to use them, and insulting the DM on the way when he agreed to. They then adopted the same classes without a thought as soon as they were republished in hardback and refused to acknowledge their previous behaviour.

Judging from what I read daily, I have the feeling that 4e is the next excuse to generate more of the same, and I will not support this "I am the only one in charge" power trip by adhering to this new edition.

I don't stand around being bossed in real life, even in work, so why should I in my gaming life ?

Why should I spend any amount of my precious limited leisure time with that kind of people ?

Anyways, end of the rant, and thank you for your attention.

 

[Glyfair]

Didn't TSR totally screw up D&D...yet the "industry" continued.

I think this is a misunderstanding. Although opinions and tastes vary, the problem wasn't that TSR "screwed up D&D." The problem was that TSR screwed up TSR. They made very bad business decisions, and that was affecting the company.

Sure, TSR may have laid some big eggs towards the end of D&D. However, they also had some very successful products. Planescape appeared in those days, for example. In fact, the success of some of those products might have been part of the problems, because they were good products handled with poor business sense.

Look at Planescape. It was very successful and it managed to pull fans from other settings. People with limited budgets (which is a large part of the D&D market) had choices to make, so stopped buying the other products they were buying. More products were produced, but for only a small overall gain in profit.

Look at the Encyclopedia Magica series. I've heard reports that the first book ended up with a production cost higher than the price. I don't know how this happened, but it was clearly an issue. Note the decrease in production quality of the later books.

When 3E was announced there was a loud outcry that D&D was fine and a part of the fanbase didn't want it changed. This isn't the sign of an brand that's dying (at least not with the amount of outcry there was).

 

[Daztur]

Very dismissive of the 3e grognards . . .

We'll see. I think that there'll be a good number of 3e players in the short term since people will want to use the books they've bought but I don't think that 3e will be able to hold on to as many people long-term as the earlier editions.

I would have bought the new edition if only for collecting, but since I have an issue with the behaviour of some 4e fans, I won't.

That's a strange bit of logic.

 

[Maggan]

I have no way of quantifying this thought into real statistics, but many of the grognards you are so quick to dismiss are established GMs. Without good GMs (in D&D or any PnP game), new players are perhaps less likely to come away with the impression that the game is fun.

Which touches upon another question I've been wondering about.

I've been playing D&D for 22 years. Long enough for some "grognard" cred, I think. I've spent tons of money on D&D over the years; D&D BECM, AD&D 1st, AD&D 2nd, D&D3e and even other TSR games.

I'm ready to embrace 4e as yet another option to run at the table. WotC aint losing my 22 years of GMing experience, and neither will it lose that of my friends, some who have been playing for close to 30 years.

Which leads up to my question; is a grognard automatically hostile to the game? And if so, what do we call those GMs who have spend a fortune on the game, who have been playing for for than 20 years, and who are positive to the development of the game?

And perhaps more importantly; how many of us are there, compared to what is normally characterised as a grognard?

/M

 

[Minicol]

We'll see. I think that there'll be a good number of 3e players in the short term since people will want to use the books they've bought but I don't think that 3e will be able to hold on to as many people long-term as the earlier editions.


That's a strange bit of logic.

Not necessarily. I was one of the "buy to support the game" people. I bought plenty of books which I thought were crap even before opening the cover. For the sake of a complete collection, and because I was hurt badly when TSR went under. Somehow, I still thought I was benefitting from these books.

Now, since the game is made hostile to me even before anything is published by a small coterie of unfriendly fanatics, who will spit on us whatever we do or say, why should I go on supporting THEIR game by spending MY hard-won money on THEIR fun ?

Otherwise, "Grognard" is not a term that I think anybody voluntariy chose at first, unless I'm mistaken, it's more something of a label that people put on you. Kinda racist slang.

Maybe rather than new editions, the game needs broader-minded people and attitudes, so that it looks more like an open-minded hobby, and less as a retarded male-teenager club ? Because no matter what the rules are like, if we keep seeing that kind of things, I don't see many who would like to join.

 

[Gwathlas]

Not necessarily. I was one of the "buy to support the game" people. I bought plenty of books which I thought were crap even before opening the cover. For the sake of a complete collection, and because I was hurt badly when TSR went under. Somehow, I still thought I was benefitting from these books.

Now, since the game is made hostile to me even before anything is published by a small coterie of unfriendly fanatics, who will spit on us whatever we do or say, why should I go on supporting THEIR game by spending MY hard-won money on THEIR fun ?

Otherwise, "Grognard" is not a term that I think anybody voluntariy chose at first, unless I'm mistaken, it's more something of a label that people put on you. Kinda racist slang.

Maybe rather than new editions, the game needs broader-minded people and attitudes, so that it looks more like an open-minded hobby, and less as a retarded male-teenager club ? Because no matter what the rules are like, if we keep seeing that kind of things, I don't see many who would like to join.

Likewise for me, in anotehr thread I pointed out money is not the question. It's the approach wotc used and the fact none of their snippets or releases has has been in the least exciting. The impression I get is they are dumbing down the game to get more players The changes to FR are arbitrary with out consideration to the core customers.

I don't want to see D&D tank but I won't buy 4e or any further wotc/hasbor products. I have 3.5 and can happily contiue gaming for the rest of my gaming life.