What would it take for 4E to win over the old guard? (Forked Thread: Changeover Poll)

[I'm A Banana]

I'm not really part of the old guard (Shemmy's description is probably most accurate), and we are currently playing a 4e game, so there aren't hugely strong opinions on the matter (mine is probably the strongest, and I do want to learn to tolerate 4e).

4e probably can't persuade me into actually singing its praises. The things I have big issues with are just too deeply ingrained in 4e to extract without 5e. Things like the powers system, "damage + move/condition" format, minis-/map-focused combat, fluff/rules disconnect, "statblocks are all you need" monster philosophy, schoedinger's wounding, "everything's core," ...

But there are 4e things that maybe could win me over. Diverse class mechanics, a workable GSL, better monsters, more non-combat abilities, a "mortal" teir, better narrative structure, more improv assistance, more old-school ideas making true reappearances (not castrated reappearences like much of what poor FR got), more things focusing on a living breathing game world than on the game world as a stage for whatever escapades the PC's want to get into...

4e could probably never make me excited about it. But they might at least make me not unhappy about it, perhaps even grudgingly accepting of it. 4e's deepest problems are perhaps un-solvable, but there's a lot of room to work in the shallower pools to make a pretty good game.

And as for attracting a new, young audience....they could easily do that and retain everything that *I* think is important to D&D.

You can make D&D as appealing as a night of boggle or scrabble ("dungeon packs" with pregen characters and a totally new dungeon that all you have to do is sit down and run through).

You can put D&D online (the Compendium could be so much better, the character creator and the game table are good ideas that have yet to materialize...).

You can skew the fantasy sources younger and more modern (Barbarians are a little "1970's." Today we love kid ninjas and boy wizards and fluffy pets! We also have no problem with creative anachronism, but we do have a problem with pandering "4Kids!" storylines.).

I'm not a h4t3r. I play 4e. I just don't have as much fun with it as I did with 3e.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Haven't voted. No option matches my opinion. I am a veteran gamer and I agree with Oni above.

To expand a little, some people like 3.x and see no flaws and don't want to move. Some people liked ogl product and are upset with 4.e because WOTC removed support for 3rd party stuff.

There is no simple defining characteristic to the people that like 3.x over 4.0 to say that any rules fix would work. Given that reverting to 3.x besides not really an option would loose people that currently like 4.e
Also I do not see any future edition of D&D under the current management being anything like 3.x because that would open all sorts of legal issues re the OGL/GSL

In time some of the people currently playing 3.x/Pathfinder may move to 4e and perhaps even some of the current 4.0 players may move back for a specific campaign. And people will also move on to other systems.

 

[El Mahdi]

I and my group are all in our 30's with 20+ years gaming experience each.

4e has been embraced wholeheartedly by us and most of us havent played D&D for over 6 years.

EDIT: I didnt vote as your poll does not have the "Play the game you enjoy and stop bitching about games other people enjoy" option.

How is this poll, or even the majority of the posts on here, "bitching"? Not to mention I feel that was incredibly rude and snarky of you.

I doubt there's a 3E gamer that doesn't feel there are shortcomings with 3E. The majority of us (at least I did) were greatly anticipating 4E, especially because we thought that it might "fix" the problems with 3E. Instead, it created an entirely new system with it's own new problems. A system that doesn't appeal to a large section of older gamers. This poll and thread isn't a bitch. It's a valid question and exploration of what it would take to bring these older gamers that stuck with 3E to 4E or even the next edition. Nothing more, nothing less.

I think your post was really uncalled for.

 

[WayneLigon]

I think what will win most people over is time. There's a lot of rage and resistance still five months into the thing, but that will disipate over time especially as the 'old guard' finds that a lot of their imcoming player base over the next few years will be 'new guard', so rather than leave the hobby they'll switch. About this time next year, I expect most of the complaints and bitching will be done.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I doubt there's a 3E gamer that doesn't feel there are shortcomings with 3E. The majority of us (at least I did) were greatly anticipating 4E, especially because we thought that it might "fix" the problems with 3E. Instead, it created an entirely new system with it's own new problems.

This kind of sums up the wonkiness with 4e almost entirely.

It's like they realized that 3e was almost fine as-is, and the only way they could justify a full 4e (as opposed to a 3.75 or 3e REVISED or whatever) was to completely abandon 3e and just make a fantasy RPG that used d20's.

They kind of ignored the question of: "Okay, we have people who like 3e now. How do we make them like 4e?"

 

[Umbran]

At this point, for many, I think this is rather like saying "What would it take for TV series X to win over more viewers?"

The fact of the matter is that by its current structure it has particular characteristics - it has its own "flavor", if you will. Not everybody likes it. For them, the answer becomes, "Not be what it is."

 

[Oni]

You can skew the fantasy sources younger and more modern (Barbarians are a little "1970's." Today we love kid ninjas and boy wizards and fluffy pets! We also have no problem with creative anachronism, but we do have a problem with pandering "4Kids!" storylines.).

Imagine the uproar this would cause.

I can see it now, all the racial starting ages could be lowered to 10-12 and roles will now include the plucky one, the smart one, and the moody one, and instead of one character the having a familiar, the party chooses a mascot.

....why do I want to do this now.

 

[I'm A Banana]

the 'old guard' finds that a lot of their imcoming player base over the next few years will be 'new guard', so rather than leave the hobby they'll switch.

I wouldn't be so sure that...

(a) the 'new guard' will be most of the incoming player base (as opposed to people who just haven't played D&D of any kind before)

or that...

(b) the 'old guard' will be as willing to convert as opposed to dropping the hobby.

I would think the scenario of an 'old guard' DM showing a 'new guard' player group that it's not the system as much as it is the DM (and, as an experienced 'old guard' DM, they'll run a great game under an older system) that makes the hobby worthwhile would be just as likely.

Or just saying "You know, I don't need to play D&D to be happy..." and going off to Bingo night down at the local old folks' home.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Imagine the uproar this would cause.

I can see it now, all the racial starting ages could be lowered to 10-12 and roles will now include the plucky one, the smart one, and the moody one, and instead of one character the having a familiar, the party chooses a mascot.

....why do I want to do this now.

I would play it in a heartbeat.

Fantasy is often at it's best when it's coming-of-age, and personality archetypes are often more important than class archetypes.

Heck, I'm going off in my little corner to think about the design for this game RIGHT NOW, this post has me so excited.

 

[Greg K]

My group is comprised of individuals 19-40. Four players are 19-23, one is 27 and the others are 36-40. We also have there other part-time players (ages19,21,37) The 19-23 year olds started rpging mid to late 2e or 3e (evenly split).

Here is what think that 4e did right:
1. most Non biological aspects of race as feats.
2. multiclassing does not grant automatic armor and weapon proficiencids
3. multiclassing does not grant saving throw bonuses
4. unified save progression
5. No Level Drain
6. No XP costs
7. spellcasters are balanced (despite my dislike of the mechanics).
8. more starting hit points
9. Feywild
10. Shadowfell

What would it have to do to get us playing? For starters
1. More nods towards simulation
2. Biological racial abilities should be the same regardless of whether a PC or NPC (dark vision vs. low light vision).
3. Remove Per Encounter and Daily. For martial exploits, go with a Book of Iron Might appoach.
4. Replace Divine Challenge
5. Not all class abilties need to do damage (e.g, illusions spells in the Dragon article)
6. Less consolidation of skills and reintroduction of craft, perform, and profession
7. reintroduce sKill points for PCs and remove the +1/2 level bonus from level that applies to ability checks and skill checks.
8. Rework Hit Points.
9. Rework Action Points to be more like M&M Hero Points
10. Introduce a Star Wars Condition Track
11. Rework the rules for Healing and Healing surges
12. Add rules for long term injury
13. Remove alternate abilities scores to hit (e.g, Con)
14. Rewrite the rules for Daily Items
15. Rewrite Milestones (see Rel's House rules)
17. Rewrite monetary types, and equipment lists to be like earlier editions.
18. Clarify how p.42 is supposed to be used (see the thread elsewhere on this forum).
19. Give the DM a system for building combat maneuvers
20. Go back to all or nothing for things like the medusas gaze
21. More real world animals
22. More fluff on monster
23. More non-combat abilities for monsters