The Nature of Change (or, Understanding Edition Wars)

[Scribble]

I'm pretty sure I just demonstrated how it does fit. You pointed out that a fan of old Coke would have his horde of old cans to keep him going for a while, but eventually he'll run out. He might be able to buy some more on eBay for the next few years, but eventually the supply will diminish and the price of the few left will skyrocket, effectively cutting him off.

THE SAME THING will happen with 3e players: I have my current gaming group. If I lose a player in the next year or so, I probably won't have too much trouble replacing them. But in five years, it won't be so easy. Once we reach 10, it will probably be pretty difficult.

It is EXACTLY the same thing, stretched over a longer timescale.

With old coke, once the supply runs dry that's it. It's impossible to get more.

"pretty difficult" isn't impossible. Players are a renewable resource. it might be harder to get more 3e players, but harder again isn't impossible. Hey you can even create new players if you want. "hey guys lets try this other system."

This is just wrong.

If 4e didn't exist, 3e would be being published, new players would be playing it, and 3e fans on the whole would be well off.

This is assuming new players want to play 3e, and that if 4e didn't exist 3e would continue to be published indefinitely.

If 4e existed in a form that appealed more to 3e fans, they would switch over to it, and have in print books, new players, etc.

Great?

The fact that it was created as a replacement for the game they find superior makes it directly responsible for the decline of their preferred system.

They find it superior. You're saying they angry at 4e because other people have different tastes then they do.

 

[Imaro]

Your argument breaks down horribly under scrutiny.

Using this board as a representative cross section of the gaming community is unscientific, anecdotal and flat-out ridiculous. This board is one miniscule, nay, microscopic segment of the gaming population. The WotC boards would be better and still wouldn't pass muster under any reasonable measure.

Using the football boards I frequent as an example, by your definition the VAST majority of sports fans are poltically liberal to very liberal. Demographics have shown otherwise.

Also, the use of the word suspicions vs. suppositions also weakens your stance considerably. Suspicions is construed as an accusation limiting debate vs. suppositions which is just stating a theory where open debate is needed.

I believe the legal term for what has happened to your argument is pwned.

Here's something interesting I'd like you and anyone else that keeps claiming these boards don't provide any type of valid cross section for determining anything about D&D to read...

MM= Mike Mearls for those who don't know.

CH: Where were you drawing the feedback from where those trouble spots are?

MM: A lot of that was internal. Obviously everyone in R&D plays a lot of D&D. A lot of it came from cruising messageboards. It’s interesting how you don’t see Wizards people posting a lot, either on ENWorld or the Wizards boards, but we read a lot of threads. A lot of it is just seeing the same complaints crop up again and again. I don’t know how many times I saw someone complain that their games took too much time to prep. There were a lot of DMs saying that prepping for their 10th level game was like doing homework. Numbers have to be crunched and a lot of stuff has to come up. We looked at adventures and came up with a new format.
Just looking at what people are doing with our games and figuring out, just how can we make that easier, and how can we respond to what they’re doing. When we started talking about a new edition, we said “it has to be compelling, because this game is good.” We have to find ways that speak to people who play D&D. People who play D&D are really smart about what D&D is and what it isn’t. You’re not just selling cars to someone who has never popped the hood and has no idea what you’re talking about. You have to speak in that sort of technical language, since that’s what people respond to. It is a challenge, because you don’t want people to feel like idiots for liking third edition.

Now argue all you want about validity of the information on these boards, but it seems, from Mike's answer above, the posters on this board can be used as a valid cross section of the gaming community for determining what problems should be addressed in D&D, (It's just a shame they felt no need to determine the way in which we wanted our problems fixed as well.), Any way I wonder how the fact we can be used for this type of data fits in with us being insignificant for other types of data? Hmmm...

 

[RFisher]

That's beautiful.

Thanks for adding that to my vocabulary.

I stole it from Sun. When they first made Java public they advertised it as “buzzword compliant”.

One observation I have is that the original posting could be applied to trying any other roleplaying game, rather than shifting from 3e to 4e.

Like I said, people are resistant to trying classic D&D. If they give it a chance, though, they eventually find the “transforming idea”. They find they like it and start evangelizing it.

The rules and culture of games like Bridge and Hearts (or Checkers, Backgammon, Chess, etc.) have not changed significantly since the games were first invented/introduced.

I’d say that the rate of change has decelerated over time so that it is now effectively static. (You’ll still find little changes in the rules of official Chess organizations, but the rules are essentially static.) That looks like a healthy development to me. The all-over-the-chart rate-of-change from the history of D&D does not look healthy to me.

Music played live progressed to music you played on acetate at home, to music played on the radio,... to music that you take with you and download digitally.

Ah, so that’s why I have to go to eBay to hear live music! ^_^

I believe we made a product a lot of people wanted. Is it for everyone? No, but my sales show me a lot of people did want it.

If we return it, will it show up in those sales figures? If we can’t return it, is there a way to get our dissatisfaction to show up in your sales figures?

I wonder if there's enough demand for someone to retro-clone OD&D?

I’m going to have to say that there is, but I’m too rushed (or lazy) to search out the link right now. ^_^

 

[RFisher]

Now argue all you want about validity of the information on these boards, but it seems, from Mike's answer above, the posters on this board can be used as a valid cross section of the gaming community for determining what problems should be addressed in D&D

Because someone can make the assumption that ENWorld is a representative cross-section and that they can make decisions based on that assumption—this doesn’t mean they are right.

There is always the danger that in fixing what is a problem for a squeaky wheel minority will compromise what made your product successful among the content and silent majority.

I’m not saying that this mistake was made in 4e, BTW. I’m not saying that Mearls didn’t have valid reasons for considering ENWorld a representative cross-section either. Maybe he did; maybe he didn’t.

 

[Imaro]

If we return it, will it show up in those sales figures? If we can’t return it, is there a way to get our dissatisfaction to show up in your sales figures?

This, if only it would...and some xp for you.

 

[Imaro]

Because someone can make the assumption that ENWorld is a representative cross-section and that they can make decisions based on that assumption—this doesn’t mean they are right.

There is always the danger that in fixing what is a problem for a squeaky wheel minority will compromise what made your product successful among the content and silent majority.

I’m not saying that this mistake was made in 4e, BTW. I’m not saying that Mearls didn’t have valid reasons for considering ENWorld a representative cross-section either. Maybe he did; maybe he didn’t.

What I'm saying is this is proof, not speculation, that we were and probably still are used as a cross representation of gamers for WotC as far as D&D goes, and really that's what matters... not whether it's right or wrong... just that it is.

 

[Herschel]

I'm pretty sure I just demonstrated how it does fit. You pointed out that a fan of old Coke would have his horde of old cans to keep him going for a while, but eventually he'll run out. He might be able to buy some more on eBay for the next few years, but eventually the supply will diminish and the price of the few left will skyrocket, effectively cutting him off.

THE SAME THING will happen with 3e players: I have my current gaming group. If I lose a player in the next year or so, I probably won't have too much trouble replacing them. But in five years, it won't be so easy. Once we reach 10, it will probably be pretty difficult.

It is EXACTLY the same thing, stretched over a longer timescale.



This is just wrong.

If 4e didn't exist, 3e would be being published, new players would be playing it, and 3e fans on the whole would be well off.

If 4e existed in a form that appealed more to 3e fans, they would switch over to it, and have in print books, new players, etc.

The fact that it was created as a replacement for the game they find superior makes it directly responsible for the decline of their preferred system.

LoL, wow, sorry man, but your logic (and others trying to use the Coke analogy) is a total leap. I have a six-pack of Billy Beer my dad saved for me. Should I still drink it? You're comparing a perishable consumable to a game. Even if you are worried about your hard copies of game material, you can scan and PDF them. Pretty hard to digitally save a soft drink.

You can also house rule and create new stuff for any edition you want. Lord knows I do/did. That's almost the essence of the game.

I started many players in D&D in my 1E/2E hybrid, a couple as recently as August 2008. Copping a line from "Field of Dreams": If you run it (well), they will come.


You are actually incorrect. 3E had most likely blown its publishing wad. On these message boards there were a lot of complaints about material being repeated in the source books more frequently to 'fill them out'. What does that tell you? It tells you the same source you are incorrectly using as a representative sample of the gaming industry is now debating the opposite side of what they "said" they wanted. People noticed a trend of repitition. They didn't like it.

"Stop repeating all this info, it's terrible and a waste of my money! I'm not going to buy any more of this crap!"

Fast Forward 6 months:

"What have you done to MY game? Where is my new stuff for MY game? I want to buy more of the other stuff, not this new crap!"

Another fallacy. If you find a game/edition superior, you play it regardless if it's 1E, 2E, 3E, 4E, GURPS, Cyberpunk 1,2 or 3(?), Shadowrun 1,2,3 or 4, Hackmaster, Girls With Guns, whatever.

Your argument also completely breaks down with the statement prior to that. Using the exact same anecdotal evidence you use for an apples-to-apples comparison, a rather large number of '3E fans' HAVE switched. Sales figures would also indicate a large portion of people have switched.

 

[Scribble]

Here's something interesting I'd like you and anyone else that keeps claiming these boards don't provide any type of valid cross section for determining anything about D&D to read...

I agree with you about this one Imaro. Saying the boards are "useless" for determining things about D&D is kind of silly in my opinion.

What I DO feel is that also need to understand/ take into account what data obtained from enworld represents.

 

[Herschel]

and what the does pwned mean anyhow? been seeing that word here for a year now and have no clue what it stands for.

I had to ask that question myself a while back. Apparently it was a common typographical error for "owned" used often in MMORPGs and such that just became commonly used. I used to find it annoying, now I find it just silly.

 

[Herschel]

i agree with you about this one imaro. Saying the boards are "useless" for determining things about d&d is kind of silly in my opinion.

What i do feel is that also need to understand/ take into account what data obtained from enworld represents.

exactly!