The fragmentation of the D&D community... was it inevitable?

[DragonLancer]

With this in mind, I have three questions:
1) Is it possible to create an edition of D&D that could largely satisfy 90% of the player base?
2) If it's not possible now, was it possible in 2007, before 4e was released?
3) If it's not possible (now or then), what should Wizards, or whoever owns the D&D IP in the future, do about it?

1. Nope. People want different things out of their D&D games whether it's the feel of a game system or how that system works. Some people won't adapt, some won't even consider changing and others just won't like the new stuff. All of them are just as right as one another. The best WotC can do is create a version that will satisfy a majority.

2. I don't think so for the same reasons I mentioned above. They may have kept more people if they hadn't drastically changed the D&D system.

3. Lots and lots of talking to us. By us I mean the vocal minority. Most players won't care too much and will just play the version they like. But those of us who love this game and are vocal about it are the ones they need to design a game for. Talk to us on forums, at conventions, on MSN or Facebook. They need to talk to those of us who are passionate about D&D in order to adquately come up with the best possible system.

 

[Sizzaxe]

Seems to me that such an issue really revolves around people preferring one style/edition over another. If it we were me and the world were perfect, then the owners of the name would support all the editions.

Unrealistic, I know, but I see no other way to satisfy 90% of the D&D crowd.

Personally, I left the D&D books behind after trying to hold onto AD&D for some time. Started playing in '81 and played up to 2000+. changed to Hackmaster because it seemed to me to be the heir to the kind of game I like to play. And the Kenzerco crowd and the HM community are aces.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

1) ...
2) No I don't think it was. Plenty of people disliked 3e and stuck with the older editions. And now plenty of people dislike 4e and stick with the older edition. I'm not even sure it's a sound strategy to try and carry fans over, true fans who like the edition they're in. To them that is the definitive game- and to them the designers have done their job well. I think new editions really speak to those who like the D&D brand, but not the system (it was for me, anyway).

....

I think this need to be emphasised, I have been playing for 20+ now I do not have a lot of material but I have a fair bit. I have meet 3e era players/DM who bought a lot more stuff than I did. But if WoTC has a choice between selling to new player and selling to old player but not to both it make more sense to sell to new players because they do not have shelves of games and material. If I want to set something in the Dales in FR I can take my 3.x books and the 4e campaingn/player guides and extrapolate. I really do not need more material but the newbie has nothing. So I might not buy anything else on the Realms but the new guy will buy it all.

 

[Stormonu]

With this in mind, I have three questions:
1) Is it possible to create an edition of D&D that could largely satisfy 90% of the player base?
2) If it's not possible now, was it possible in 2007, before 4e was released?
3) If it's not possible (now or then), what should Wizards, or whoever owns the D&D IP in the future, do about it?

I have to agree with Treebore. Before the widespread communication of the internet during 2E days, I had never considered the idea that people had stayed with 1E or OD&D - or that people had not started with BECMI to move "forward" to AD&D. With the ability to share information, preferences and such discourse there's actually a lot of disincentive to move on to a new edition.

As to your questions:

1) Anything's possible I suppose, but realistically I don't think someone is going to hit just the right formula to do it.

2) I don't think it was possible after the internet became fairly popular around 2000. The OGL makes its doubly difficult.

3) Pick an edition and stick with it. Revise and add on, sure. Overhaul, and you're just looking for another split of the customer base and smaller revenue returns.

 

[BryonD]

90% seems an arbitrary and really high target.

But it certainly can, and has, pleased a much higher portion than it is now.

No offense to the Dragonsfoot / old-school crowd, but it has only gained ground since the 4E fragmentation, and yet it remains far smaller then either the D20/OGL crowd and the 4E crowd. Yes, you can point to individuals who are big fans of each. It doesn't make them representative of equal portions of the community.

The way I discovered that 3E was coming was I search Dungeons and Dragons and found Eric Noah's new site (before it even had a forum). I certainly would not call things identical, but the internet soap box was well in place for the full 3E cycle.

Yes, there were people who HATED 3E. But the proportions were nowhere near the same as now. Honestly, a very common critical comment aimed at 3E was that it was so popular that it was limiting innovation. To many designers were focused on D20 and new ideas were not being heard. That is not a problem we are having with 4E.

If the only thing we had to go on was counting voices on the internet, then we wouldn't know anything at all. But there are plenty of other suggestions that the market is DEEPLY split now. And even the arguments coming from the 4E apologists are drifting. For example, for months now we have been hearing one source after another talk about how the books are not selling very well. And the fans would scream in unison that their data was incomplete and therefore meaningless. And while it is certainly true that the data is limited (not meaningless), it was funny to me that a dozen so-so data points was inadequate evidence, but blind faith and nothing else was proof of success.

However, now the arguments have shifted to why the low book sales are just to be expected and don't mean anything.

There are 4E haters who try to paint everything in absolutes. And they are wrong and make easy targets for avoiding the real issue. But, the real conditions don't change.

 

[BryonD]

Overhaul, and you're just looking for another split of the customer base and smaller revenue returns.

There is a huge threat of this.

I am convinced that a game that truly appeals to a wide mass of players would pull the crowd back together. And that most certainly is not to say that making a game tied to my personal tastes is the solution. It is just to say that it CAN be done.

Though I agree with you in principle, the threat of just losing even more fans is very real. There is so much out there to choose from now that trying to be the best to "most" of the fanbase is a very high target.

 

[Aus_Snow]

1) Is it possible to create an edition of D&D that could largely satisfy 90% of the player base?
2) If it's not possible now, was it possible in 2007, before 4e was released?
3) If it's not possible (now or then), what should Wizards, or whoever owns the D&D IP in the future, do about it?

1. Hell, no.
2. Also, no.
3. Nothing can be done about it. Not by anyone.

Personally, I think that's not only a good thing, but a great one. We are - particular those of us who want to play fantasy TTRPGs - spoiled for choice like never before. You got some particular itch to scratch? Oh yeah, there'll be just the fix for that, out there somewhere. And what with search engines, blogs, online shops, forums, online social networking sites and systems... (etc.)... it's incredibly easy to find just that thing. Oh, and probably have it delivered to your door, should you so wish. Not to mention, PDFs. Previews online. Direct contact with publishers, writers, whoever (well, in some cases, anyway). And hey, online roleplaying, of course. And locating players/GMs for real world gaming, as well.

In fact, the point about communication brings me back to the other thing I like about this "fragmentation" (i.e., diversity) - it's going back to its roots. Or, on a bigger scale than ever, more to the point. Small operations, real communication, genuine enthusiasm from these fellow passionate gamers who happen to be making something you want. That kind of thing. Print on demand is just one bit of the picture here.

It started free from big business and all that comes with that. And that's where it's headed. Or, at least, it's where more and more of the "industry" (*snort*) is going, year by year.

Anyway, that's how I see things. Needless to say, perhaps, YMMV (etc.)

 

[BryonD]

I think this need to be emphasised, I have been playing for 20+ now I do not have a lot of material but I have a fair bit. I have meet 3e era players/DM who bought a lot more stuff than I did. But if WoTC has a choice between selling to new player and selling to old player but not to both it make more sense to sell to new players because they do not have shelves of games and material. If I want to set something in the Dales in FR I can take my 3.x books and the 4e campaingn/player guides and extrapolate. I really do not need more material but the newbie has nothing. So I might not buy anything else on the Realms but the new guy will buy it all.

True.

3E is done.
Clearly Pathfinder is doing quite well on the 3E foundation. But their success is based much more on using a solid system to showcase their story prowess than on pure mechanics. 3E satisfaction plus 4E dissatisfaction plus great story are all key parts of Pathfinder.

Just trying to be huge selling more and more 3E rules this long after initial publication would be a bad plan for anyone. The game MUST move on from 3E to thrive.

I love 3E. But it is done. I completely support the idea of moving on. I just think you have to move on a correct direction.

 

[Jeffrey]

Sure, every edition before 4th "fragmented" the customer base a bit.

Toss in the foolish disrespect shown by WOTC towards their own customer base at the 4e launch and this time the split was serious and personal for many.

Yeah, the dragon crapped on someone, but it's not till these past few years that we're now seeing the end result of that kind of actions and attitude towards the customer.

 

[shadzar]

No offense to the Dragonsfoot / old-school crowd, but it has only gained ground since the 4E fragmentation, and yet it remains far smaller then either the D20/OGL crowd and the 4E crowd.

That could be because of the fragmentation created by the 3rd edition itself, and because of the marketing at the time.

I didn't see it as I found out about 3rd edition...I don't even remember...think it was WotC website or the comic store I was helping with at the time, but it definitely pushed itself while removing support for older editions, same as 2nd edition removed support for OD&D.

The removing of the support could play a LARGE part of why there is fragmentation as well as the advertising. "If you been playing 3.x you've been doing it wrong and not having fun", as the advertising of 4th suggested.

So lack of support could ahve been hindering ANY edition from having the same numbers as the fragmentation already caused confusion and separation, as well the lack of support made it where new people couldn't have entry level access to get their own.

That might be the biggest thing causing fragmentation, lack of support. Unilateral support would strengthen the community some, and strengthen the "brand", but weaken each product for each edition.