Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Water, water everywhere, Nor any drop to drink
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6835480" data-attributes="member: 996"><p>There's "remember" and then there's "agree with you." The point you're trying to make is that 4e was somehow wildly unpopular with D&Ders, and it wasn't, indeed, you get into why, below...</p><p></p><p>Fans of any particular edition, exclusive of all other editions, are certainly <em>each</em> in a fairly small minority. I don't even fall into the category of '4e fan,' when you set that bar. I've been playing the game since 1980, and in that time, only the second half of the 2e run disappointed me, and I haven't ever entirely stopped playing AD&D, 3e or 4e, even though I'm running & actively promoting 5e. </p><p></p><p>Similarly, fans who specifically rejected one edition are clearly in a small minority. Every once in a while, edition warriors would acknowledge that there really weren't that many of us causing all the fuss, and then get back to it.</p><p></p><p>I hadn't heard that quote, but it's hardly surprising. Each new ed does very well for a while, then tapers off. It fits with a very stable fan base on the one hand, and a basic model that can only move supplements for so long before bloat starts to diminish returns, on the other. Past editions have each tried to do something in particular, well, often something the prior edition really flubbed. 5e finally got the bright idea to try to do everything past editions had done particularly well, at least, with an optional rule or few in place. They called that 'modular,' which conjures the wrong idea (and a much higher bar) in my mind, because of my professional background, but, looking at what they actually came up with, and how neatly in dovetails with the RAW-repudiating 'rulings not rules' maxim, it's surprisingly workable. It's just not there yet, and stuff modern D&D did well (both 3e & 4e) is where the most still needs to be done. Though, if we're being realistic, 5e can only ever get details of 3.5 (like PrCs, perhaps) & 4e (like the warlord) 'right,' it can never go back to the RAW-uber-alles system-mastery rewards of 3.5 or the balance-uber-alles structure of 4e, there's just no foundation for either - and 5e treats such player-empowerment schemes as antithetical to it's DM-empowerment mandate.</p><p></p><p>There's no question 4e didn't perform as it needed to. The goals set for 4e were unrealistic, the entire industry has never even come close, RPGs, even D&D never did break into the mainstream like video games & MMOs have. D&D was given some serious resources to take a shot at an unprecedented level of success, instead of being dropped to some lower level of investment, which is where it is now, having failed to establish MMO-like revenue streams. It's not a wonderful result for the business or for fans, but it's not because of the sound & fury of the edition war or 4e radically under-performing prior eds (or being so 'unpopular' that the it's innovations should be excised from the game forever), but because D&D took it's best shot, and couldn't expand it's appeal enough, even taking somewhat radical-seeming steps to break out of the box it'd been in. </p><p></p><p>Then maybe we can get past this unanswerable edition war issue of relative popularity? It doesn't matter if your faux-warlord fighter archetype sold badly on DMsG, or that D&D didn't ever reach MMO levels of income. It's really not. The Warlord has become something of a poster boy for 4e, pointedly excluding it creates an unsavory appearance of having taken sides in the edition war. Including it plays to the stated goals of 5e, not just to including the best bits from prior eds, but to expanding the range of playstyles it supports. </p><p></p><p>The World Axis cosmology was presented as an alternate, IIRC, and you can point to other bits and pieces here and there. You can also point to how higher profile aspects of 4e haven't made it over, and how those that have are marginalized or bowdlerized. So there's definitely more to be done on that front. But, no, the Warlord is the most pointed of omissions, and it's inclusion would help the game meet more of its goals, as well. If done well, it'd be an all-around win.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6835480, member: 996"] There's "remember" and then there's "agree with you." The point you're trying to make is that 4e was somehow wildly unpopular with D&Ders, and it wasn't, indeed, you get into why, below... Fans of any particular edition, exclusive of all other editions, are certainly [i]each[/i] in a fairly small minority. I don't even fall into the category of '4e fan,' when you set that bar. I've been playing the game since 1980, and in that time, only the second half of the 2e run disappointed me, and I haven't ever entirely stopped playing AD&D, 3e or 4e, even though I'm running & actively promoting 5e. Similarly, fans who specifically rejected one edition are clearly in a small minority. Every once in a while, edition warriors would acknowledge that there really weren't that many of us causing all the fuss, and then get back to it. I hadn't heard that quote, but it's hardly surprising. Each new ed does very well for a while, then tapers off. It fits with a very stable fan base on the one hand, and a basic model that can only move supplements for so long before bloat starts to diminish returns, on the other. Past editions have each tried to do something in particular, well, often something the prior edition really flubbed. 5e finally got the bright idea to try to do everything past editions had done particularly well, at least, with an optional rule or few in place. They called that 'modular,' which conjures the wrong idea (and a much higher bar) in my mind, because of my professional background, but, looking at what they actually came up with, and how neatly in dovetails with the RAW-repudiating 'rulings not rules' maxim, it's surprisingly workable. It's just not there yet, and stuff modern D&D did well (both 3e & 4e) is where the most still needs to be done. Though, if we're being realistic, 5e can only ever get details of 3.5 (like PrCs, perhaps) & 4e (like the warlord) 'right,' it can never go back to the RAW-uber-alles system-mastery rewards of 3.5 or the balance-uber-alles structure of 4e, there's just no foundation for either - and 5e treats such player-empowerment schemes as antithetical to it's DM-empowerment mandate. There's no question 4e didn't perform as it needed to. The goals set for 4e were unrealistic, the entire industry has never even come close, RPGs, even D&D never did break into the mainstream like video games & MMOs have. D&D was given some serious resources to take a shot at an unprecedented level of success, instead of being dropped to some lower level of investment, which is where it is now, having failed to establish MMO-like revenue streams. It's not a wonderful result for the business or for fans, but it's not because of the sound & fury of the edition war or 4e radically under-performing prior eds (or being so 'unpopular' that the it's innovations should be excised from the game forever), but because D&D took it's best shot, and couldn't expand it's appeal enough, even taking somewhat radical-seeming steps to break out of the box it'd been in. Then maybe we can get past this unanswerable edition war issue of relative popularity? It doesn't matter if your faux-warlord fighter archetype sold badly on DMsG, or that D&D didn't ever reach MMO levels of income. It's really not. The Warlord has become something of a poster boy for 4e, pointedly excluding it creates an unsavory appearance of having taken sides in the edition war. Including it plays to the stated goals of 5e, not just to including the best bits from prior eds, but to expanding the range of playstyles it supports. The World Axis cosmology was presented as an alternate, IIRC, and you can point to other bits and pieces here and there. You can also point to how higher profile aspects of 4e haven't made it over, and how those that have are marginalized or bowdlerized. So there's definitely more to be done on that front. But, no, the Warlord is the most pointed of omissions, and it's inclusion would help the game meet more of its goals, as well. If done well, it'd be an all-around win. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Water, water everywhere, Nor any drop to drink
Top