The Nature of Change (or, Understanding Edition Wars)

[resistor]

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.

Please reread my point. I claim that the PLAYER BASE is like the softdrink, not the books themselves. Both will run out over time.

 

[RFisher]

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.

Ah! Gotcha.

 

[Imaro]

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!"

Well I just wanted to comment on this part of your post... could it also be that WotC was just being unimaginative because they already knew 4e was coming? I know for a fact Mike Mearls had knowledge of 4e from 2005 on.

I mean the 3PP were still producing new and interesting things (adventures, campaign settings, new classes, ways of using skills, etc.) without repetition, I mean sheesh there were still parts of Eberron that hadn't been touched on and a book with expansions for the fringe classes like Hexblade's, Duskblade's, etc. would have been great. In the end I think we were given some, maybe even majority crap for 3e/3.5 to prep us for acceptance of 4e... at least by WotC.

 

[Herschel]

Please reread my point. I claim that the PLAYER BASE is like the softdrink, not the books themselves. Both will run out over time.

I suppose you could argue that the old players will eventually die, but that's kind of silly. Read mine again. If you run it (well) they will come. Your enthusiasm can carry most people farther in a game than anything printed can. I've run many groups that never expressed a desire to want to try 3E.

As long as you have ideas and fun, and express them to others, nobody can take that away and people will be drawn to it.

 

[Herschel]

Well I just wanted to comment on this part of your post... could it also be that WotC was just being unimaginative because they already knew 4e was coming? I know for a fact Mike Mearls had knowledge of 4e from 2005 on.

I mean the 3PP were still producing new and interesting things (adventures, campaign settings, new classes, ways of using skills, etc.) without repetition, I mean sheesh there were still parts of Eberron that hadn't been touched on and a book with expansions for the fringe classes like Hexblade's, Duskblade's, etc. would have been great. In the end I think we were given some, maybe even majority crap for 3e/3.5 to prep us for acceptance of 4e... at least by WotC.

I find this funny. You're only as good as your recent sales figures. Commissions and bonuses are based on them. A decent part of the company would be "cutting off their nose to spite their face", as it were.

And they still are, but look at your example: Expansions for Hexblades and Duskblades? Pretty limited subject and target audience.

 

[Imaro]

I find this funny. You're only as good as your recent sales figures. Commissions and bonuses are based on them. A decent part of the company would be "cutting off their nose to spite their face", as it were.

And they still are, but look at your example: Expansions for Hexblades and Duskblades? Pretty limited subject and target audience.

And yet you still have to devote resources, and money... probably the lion's share of both to a new flagship project, so do you think they had their best, most creative and well paid designers on late 3.5 stuff or on 4e stuff? So now which would suffer again, oh yeah 3.5... exactly what I stated earlier, yeah I guess that is kinda funny but I don't see it in any way as cutting off your nose to spite your face, especially when core books are where your game is made or broken.

Isn't everything "limited" beyond the core? I mean those were things that needed support and I certainly would have bough a $35 book that allowed me to get more use out of those particular classes along with other fringe classes that hadn't been explored beyond the basics. In fact I remembver peole clamoring for more support for these types of classes that had been introduced and then forgotten about. I'm curious what sourcebook would be a non-limited one in your opinion, you know the type that everyone would buy?

 

[diaglo]

Sure, I meant finding material already written. Like another copy of a PHB or DMG or soemthing.

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

i've been demanding it. ask (T)ed stark.
i submitted OD&D to the wotc new idea plea that eberron won.

give me enough time i'll be sure to get a few more gamers to know who wants OD&D back in print.

and new material for the greatest edition ever.

 

[Darrin Drader]

I find this funny. You're only as good as your recent sales figures. Commissions and bonuses are based on them. A decent part of the company would be "cutting off their nose to spite their face", as it were.

Absolutely true. Later 3.5 books were as high quality as any of the earlier stuff. I think some of the more interesting products came from the last couple years of 3E.

And yet you still have to devote resources, and money... probably the lion's share of both to a new flagship project, so do you think they had their best, most creative and well paid designers on late 3.5 stuff or on 4e stuff?

Because of their stable of freelancers, some of whom were previously part of the R&D department, they were able to keep the good stuff coming for 3.5 up until the one-year buildup to 4E. I have a hard time finding major fault with them for their handling of 3rd edition at any stage.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

I don't think you are the "core audience" for 3.5 Jeff, just like neither of us was really the "core audience" for miniatures as it turns out.

Sure, we're not the audience "as it turns out," but I find it very hard to believe -- again, as someone who bought every 3.5 product -- that I'm not in the audience that WotC wanted.

Scott Rouse himself said that they wanted to keep people "on the train." Did he not mean people who had been loyal customers to the point of completism? Again, I find that very difficult to believe.

If it's true, then, that WotC would have liked to keep people like me on board the train, it follows that somewhere WotC messed up pretty badly. WotC and pro-4E folks might like to say -- now -- that I got off voluntarily, but I feel like I was thrown off.

 

[Lacyon]

Yes. It took me substantially longer to come to that conclusion. I even started a thread about it, asking why I -- as someone who owns every single 3.5 product released, and thus (I'd assumed) a member of WotC's core audience -- was left behind by WotC and 4E.

It strikes me personally as wildly unsurprising that someone that happy with the current edition would be unhappy with substantial changes to it.

And the response I got from the pro-4E folks was, "WotC didn't leave you, you left WotC," or "You're not WotC's core audience." I still find both responses very confusing, but c'est la vie.

Those are... odd... things to say. It's possible they made sense in the context of that thread, I guess.