D&D 4E What should 5e do to pull in 4e players?

[Rechan]

There's all this talk of unity, but in many of the threads on this forum, many posters are pretty keen on throwing out anything related to 4e. That's ignoring an important point:

5e needs to be able to convince 4e players to play too.

The designers alienated a lot of 3e players with their actions, and sure, 4e's playstyle/presentatin/bla is not what a lot of people like and that has pushed them away. But, WotC would be just as foolish to turn around and try to get the 3e players back at the expense of throwing 4e players under the bus. They'd just be switching which fans they've put out, and maintaining the divide.

There are things 3e players want/like, and they should get them, but there has to be things that 4e players get that they like, too.

 

[Ahnehnois]

The group of 4e players includes (in some unknown proportion) a number of people who play it primarily out of brand loyalty, convenience, as well as a number who are essentially non-discriminatory. In other words, the 4e group probably includes a number of people who will buy a new edition of D&D almost regardless of what it looks like.

Conversely, the PF crowd and the 3.X crowd consist mostly of people who consciously chose those systems over 4e, for any number of reasons (not wanting to buy new books so soon, attracted by Paizo's adventures, or who disliked the marketing, licensure, and/or rules of 4e).

Thus, it seems to me that, with no particular personal criticism intended towards either group, WotC has a lot more to do to please the players it lost than the players it still has. It's also worth noting that WotC has the option of continuing 4e support through DDI and continuing to profit from it (also discussed a lot in this forum) and doesn't have to throw 4e as it is under the bus.

***

All that being said, I've seen a lot of fundamental issues raised by 4e supporters. They want short statblocks to make DM prep easier. They want high-level fighters to have better options. They want high-level wizards to have worse options. They want to be able to heal their characters without clerics. They don't want their characters' abilities exhausted after 15 minutes.

None of those issues is tied to the major mechanical constituents of 4e (powers, roles, healing surges, standard modifer, etc.). A lot of them are being addressed here, and one hopes in the WotC war room.

Many 3e fans have similar complaints about the game, but simply feel that when 4e tried to address them, the baby was thrown out with the bathwater. The beauty is, we have the opportunity to go back, start over, and try to carefully pour out the bathwater while leaving the baby unharmed, at which point, many fans from both camps can be happy. That's my theory.

 

[mkill]

What most people seem to forget is that most 4E players, pretty much everyone except the teenagers who started after 2008 (you guys rock, the game needs new blood), has been a 3rd edition player, or even around much much longer. That's why you hardly ever see the same vitriol from the 4E camp towards older editions, because most in the 4E camp have fond memories playing those older editions, too. And that includes every designer of 4th edition.

For me personally, 4th edition changed a number of things that I also saw as problems in 3rd edition (multiclass bloat, caster dominance, crud rules like spell components and favorite class). It also made DMing so much easier. I don't agree with everything in 4th ed, but it turned out to be fun.

Now, you'd expect that the 4th edition crowd represents the part of the fanbase that is more open to change and innovation. Sadly, that does not seem to be the case. During the Essentials announcement a new type of fan showed up, the 4E grognard. To him, the 4E PHB is perfect and everything after that is They Changed It Now It Sucks. Which shows you that while editions may change, humans don't.

 

[Aldarc]

The group of 4e players includes (in some unknown proportion) a number of people who play it primarily out of brand loyalty, convenience, as well as a number who are essentially non-discriminatory. In other words, the 4e group probably includes a number of people who will buy a new edition of D&D almost regardless of what it looks like.
Conversely, the PF crowd and the 3.X crowd consist mostly of people who consciously chose those systems over 4e, for any number of reasons (not wanting to buy new books so soon, attracted by Paizo's adventures, or who disliked the marketing, licensure, and/or rules of 4e).

Thus, it seems to me that, with no particular personal criticism intended towards either group, WotC has a lot more to do to please the players it lost than the players it still has. It's also worth noting that WotC has the option of continuing 4e support through DDI and continuing to profit from it (also discussed a lot in this forum) and doesn't have to throw 4e as it is under the bus.

These are some pretty large presumptions that largely seem intended to make it so that 4e players should make concessions but not 3e players. Did 4e not choose to play 4e then? Or did only non-4e players choose not to play?

 

[Ahnehnois]

These are some pretty large presumptions that largely seem intended to make it so that 4e players should make concessions but not 3e players.

As I explained, I don't think it's always that dichotomous, and I do think there are objective reasons for WotC to cater to that particular audience. I also explained the need to cater to 4e players who were critical of certain aspects of 3e and the principle of how to go about doing that.

Did 4e not choose to play 4e then? Or did only non-4e players choose not to play?

Many did. As I said, I can't put a number as to how many people have done so. However, until recently, no one played Pathfinder for the name, or out of convenience, because it wasn't a known name and wasn't convenient. I do think that PF players/3.X loyalists, most of whom consciously chose not to play 4e, are more critical of 4e than the average 4e player is of 3.X, which that 4e player likely played for years. Thus there is more work to be done to cater to those people.

3.X players also had a rather unpleasant experience with the negativity surrounding the 4e release (from the company itself), as well as the drastic change in licensure and the way many 3rd party publishers were treated, resulting in their departure from the D&D brand. I can't imagine that WotC will insult 4e fans as blatantly as they did 3.X fans. Many 3.X fans still want an apology from the company, and want to see it backed up with substance. I don't see an analagous motivation for the 4e camp.

***

Again, none of this is commentary on the people in each group themselves; this is the broad social climate that WotC has to work within. They lost a significant part of their customer base, and active effort is required if they want to get any significant number of them back.

 

[Vayden]

These are some pretty large presumptions that largely seem intended to make it so that 4e players should make concessions but not 3e players. Did 4e not choose to play 4e then? Or did only non-4e players choose not to play?

It's supposed to be an edition for all of us, right? 4e lovers need to be courted into 5e, the same as 3e, pathfinder, 2e, OD&D, etc.

As a 4e lover, here are the most important things I want to keep and a few I want to change:

Keep:
1) Non-caster classes who can do awesome things. I'm not asking for my fighter to teleport across the battlefied or have the same power model as casters, but I do want him to be built to move and interact in more ways that "attack/trip/disarm/grapple" like we were stuck with in older editions. Same for Rogues/Rangers/Warlords/Barbarians and all the rest of my stabby brethren. We need to do flashy over the top things with our sharp pieces of metal. We've been exposed to the possibility of awesome and we're not going back into servitude to the casters.

2) Easy DMing - I've DMed 3.5 and 4 (along with a few other non D&D systems), and good lord was 4 a breath of fresh air in comparison. Let us never again travel down the path of monsters and pcs using the same character creation rules. Never again.

Pretty much everything else is negotiable to me as long as it's done well.

Change:
1) Better multi-classing. We have to be able to find something more flexible than 4e but not as insanely complicated and abused as 3e.

2) Better magic items - kill the "+x" magic items and the "you get an amazingly useless daily power that you'll forget you have most of the time" magic items. If the character gets a magic item, make it memorable. Slippers of Wall Climbing, Sword of Light, Orc-Bane Axe, Quill of Perfect Forgery, etc - something that has a significant effect and isn't just book-keeping. And it'd be nice if you could use the same signature weapons/armor throughout your career if you wanted to.

3) Faster combat please.

4) A better magic system that integrates non-combat magic better than rituals did.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Keep:
1) Non-caster classes who can do awesome things. I'm not asking for my fighter to teleport across the battlefied or have the same power model as casters, but I do want him to be built to move and interact in more ways that "attack/trip/disarm/grapple" like we were stuck with in older editions. Same for Rogues/Rangers/Warlords/Barbarians and all the rest of my stabby brethren. We need to do flashy over the top things with our sharp pieces of metal. We've been exposed to the possibility of awesome and we're not going back into servitude to the casters.

2) Easy DMing - I've DMed 3.5 and 4 (along with a few other non D&D systems), and good lord was 4 a breath of fresh air in comparison. Let us never again travel down the path of monsters and pcs using the same character creation rules. Never again.

Pretty much everything else is negotiable to me as long as it's done well.

Change:
1) Better multi-classing. We have to be able to find something more flexible than 4e but not as insanely complicated and abused as 3e.

2) Better magic items - kill the "+x" magic items and the "you get an amazingly useless daily power that you'll forget you have most of the time" magic items. If the character gets a magic item, make it memorable. Slippers of Wall Climbing, Sword of Light, Orc-Bane Axe, Quill of Perfect Forgery, etc - something that has a significant effect and isn't just book-keeping. And it'd be nice if you could use the same signature weapons/armor throughout your career if you wanted to.

3) Faster combat please.

4) A better magic system that integrates non-combat magic better than rituals did.

This is what I'm talking about.

I totally agree that non-casters needed better abilities and more choices, especially at high levels (it's one of my big targets for my 3.X houserules). I don't understand the whole ease of DMing issue but I don't object to it. The rest of it I can get behind as valid criticism of all published versions of the game.

Hopefully, there won't be an overwhelming number of concessions to be made by anyone. It's entirely possible to throw some 4e folks a bone without explicitly antagonizing the PF, 3.X, retro, and indy crowds.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

The group of 4e players includes (in some unknown proportion) a number of people who play it primarily out of brand loyalty, convenience, as well as a number who are essentially non-discriminatory. In other words, the 4e group probably includes a number of people who will buy a new edition of D&D almost regardless of what it looks like.

Conversely, the PF crowd and the 3.X crowd consist mostly of people who consciously chose those systems over 4e, for any number of reasons (not wanting to buy new books so soon, attracted by Paizo's adventures, or who disliked the marketing, licensure, and/or rules of 4e).

I think the number of 4E players that fit that criteria are neglible, and that 3E/PF players are not really in a position to judge. A more trenchant observation is mkill's that there are a sizable number of 4E players that are new to the hobby, and have never tried anything else. Those are the ones that are likely to go happily along with 5E, at least at first.

This is more than balanced by the number of 3E/PF players who have made no appreciable effort to understand how or why 4E works, or have dismissed it and/or backhand complimented it as a "tactical skimish game" or other such. And people that are personally agitated at WotC over company practices separate from the quality of the games or lack thereof are unlikely to be a good source of future customers no matter what.

So while some of those can certainly be catered to, they aren't really in a position to say what will keep 4E players in the game, or why 4E players have enjoyed 4E in the first place.

 

[Wormwood]

My group(s) of 4e enthusiasts average 36 years of age and most started with AD&D.

We could all easily pick up OSRIC or C&C (or even our AD&D or 3.5 books off the shelves), but we play 4e because it is our game of choice in a crowded marketplace.

In the main we dutifully pay our DDI subscription costs, buy the occasional book, and haul our boxes of plastic and cardboard to Mike's house every Wednesday (the other group moved to Tennessee and are currently rocking 4e on a brand new Emissary gaming table).

I wouldn't speak for my group, but I know for a fact that 4e's dynamic, easy play is the reason it is my preferred game. Stepping too far 'backward' would be problematic.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I think the number of 4E players that fit that criteria are neglible, and that 3E/PF players are not really in a position to judge. A more trenchant observation is mkill's that there are a sizable number of 4E players that are new to the hobby, and have never tried anything else. Those are the ones that are likely to go happily along with 5E, at least at first.

This is more than balanced by the number of 3E/PF players who have made no appreciable effort to understand how or why 4E works, or have dismissed it and/or backhand complimented it as a "tactical skimish game" or other such.

It's all speculation in this arena; no hard statistics on anything like this. I stand by my speculation, but there's nothing more I can say on the matter.

And people that are personally agitated at WotC over company practices separate from the quality of the games or lack thereof are unlikely to be a good source of future customers no matter what.

Those are certainly the ones they're going after, the way I read the press release and all the other official words on the subject. Frankly, if that's true, WotC and D&D are toast after this gamble.

So while some of those can certainly be catered to, they aren't really in a position to say what will keep 4E players in the game, or why 4E players have enjoyed 4E in the first place.

I suspect that's true. Hopefully both the ENW discussions and those at WotC HQ will include a diverse group.