What's really at stake in the Edition Wars

[Desdichado]

So what did I have to lose?

Most of what you claim is a bit spurious... but I see what you mean.

1. A game I've enjoyed for 25 plus years.

I haven't enjoyed D&D that long; in fact, I specifically quit enjoying it (because it wasn't that enjoyable to me) until 3e came out. That said, I've enjoyed 3e/3.5 for ten years now, and I'm still doing so. The release of 4e hasn't made that any more difficult for me.

2. A breakdown of the group that I've been playing with for 20 years as arguments for and against the new rules create acrimony.

Is that hypothetical, or real? Either way, wow, that's some bad group dynamics for a bunch of guys who are supposed to be friends. If there was a good split in my group between 4e and 3.5, we'd probably switch between the two of them every six months or so.

3. No support from the company any longer as they abandon the old ruleset for the new. No new modules, no new splatbooks, no new magazines or articles.

That's a valid point, but at the same time, I'm just curious; how much of the available support for 3e/3.5 have you used already? I'm hardly a completionist in my 3e/3.5 collection, but I've got stuff I can use for twenty more years easily without running out.

And, of course, technically it's still supported via the OGL, and arguably through Pathfinder.

4. All your old books you know intimately becomse useless. The thousand dollars you spent on books is now worthless for the most part.

At the end of the day, that's why I wasn't really interested in switching. I don't dislike 4e. I don't really know enough about it to dislike it, to be honest with you. I don't want to buy all over again all the stuff that I already have, though. I was quite happy with my 3e/3.5 purchases, and I don't feel like I"m anywhere close to "amortizing" or "depreciating" all that purchase yet from an accounting perspective.

That said, your old books are only useless if you never use them again. So, that's not really accurate what you say, there. I'm not an edition warrior just because I didn't change to 4e. I'm, like I said earlier, a bemused spectator. But if you don't want to change over, just don't change over. Why the warring?

That's the question that's really being asked here; what you answered was merely why you don't want to switch over.

5. When a ruleset changes this much, all your old characters become worthless. No way to transfer them over and get the same feel as the old characters because the changes are so radical. That guy you spent years getting to level 20 plus is now just a scrap of worthless paper if you switch unless you can stomach him being a shadow of his former self.

All the more reason to not switch until you're done with the game you're in. Not a reason to edition war.

6. The game moving from about literary/simulationist to about balance focused/gamist. D&D previously focused on a literary model to some degree with touches of simulationist philosophy thrown in. 4E moved away from fantasy tropes to focus on balance and gamist philosophy. Most of my love of fantasy came from books before games, so I prefer that a fantasy game be built like a fantasy novel. 4E did not do that while previous editions had included certain fantasy tropes like the ancient wizard being very powerful. Fighters being straightforward fighters good with weapons. Not the case with 4E.

Again, reasons to not like 4e. Reasonable ones, even. Not reasons to engage in edition wars.

So I felt I had alot to lose in this edition wars.

It looks to me like the only thing you had to lose was continued support and possibly group support if you're group was likely to embrace 4e. Most of the rest of what you claim, you wouldn't ever have actually lost.

 

[billd91]

Somebody dropped mustard on your hamburger dudes they didnt give you a salad.

See, here's that dismissiveness stuff that I mentioned. Someone mentions how they feel about changes, maybe uses an analogy, and someone else redefines it for them into something insignificant.

It would be nice if people did take each other at face value a bit more.

Plus, I know people for whom dropping the wrong condiment on a burger would render it instantly inedible even if it were still a perfectly cooked, juicy hamburger otherwise.

 

[DaveyJones]

See, here's that dismissiveness stuff that I mentioned. Someone mentions how they feel about changes, maybe uses an analogy, and someone else redefines it for them into something insignificant.

It would be nice if people did take each other at face value a bit more.

Plus, I know people for whom dropping the wrong condiment on a burger would render it instantly inedible even if it were still a perfectly cooked, juicy hamburger otherwise.

well no one is tossing his salad in prison. plus he can't even play 4e there if i read a recent thread correctly.

 

[Umbran]

It is all point of view.

Actually, no, it isn't. That's part of the point.

I don't know how many people here have ever "fired a customer". I have had the dubious pleasure (working in a veterinary hospital, long story). Firing a customer is an active process. Failing to provide what the customer needs and/or wants so that they leave of their own accord is a passive process. They are fundamentally different kinds of decisions as far as the business is concerned.

I don't contest what people feel happened, but feelings of the customer often do not reflect the decision process that actually happened in the business. This is a fundamental truth of customer service.

I do think WotC pleased a lot less people than they could have pleased. And I also suspect they are pleasing less than they planned.

You are welcome to your opinion. I don't think I (or anyone outside WotC) has the business information on hand to know for sure.

 

[ScottS]

I haven't substantially contributed to the flame wars since release, but my posts have shaded somewhat towards the critical... Here are my main two justifications for negative posts about 4e:

1. I don't have it out for WOTC, Hasbro, the developers, etc., but I wouldn't mind it terribly if the market punished them for putting out what I consider to be bad product. Discussing why/how the product is bad with fellow customers is one small way of contributing to that outcome.

2. Since forums like these are in some sense a support system for RPGers, I also feel I'm helping other gamers by pointing out the obvious drawbacks of the current edition. You have to be able to identify what's bad about a rules system before you can work on appropriate fixes/workarounds (and I do also try to provide advice, pass on tips etc. about how our group has dealt with rules-related issues).

 

[Umbran]

Change is inevitable.

This specific change, at that moment in time may have not have been.

True. But, as I've already said, no matter what change they made, someone was going to be upset.

I know a new edition is a financial shot in the arm, but the treadmill might not be the ideal way of milking the most dollars out of the most potential customers.

Possibly not. But to my knowledge, nobody on these forums has ever publicly approached the question of business models with any rigor whatsoever. We may spend hours and hours doing mathematical analysis to determine a build's average damage output, but we don't do the same for how the people who print the game are supposed to pay their mortgages.

 

[BryonD]

Actually, no, it isn't. That's part of the point.

If you are saying that in the end the company's point of view doesn't really matter to the economics and it all comes down to the customer, then I agree with you. I was not trying to speak to economic result. I was speaking to differences in interpretation. And WotC and 4E fans can be boggled that others took exception to certain statements and yet neither side is being dishonest about their own perception. It is all point of view.

You are welcome to your opinion. I don't think I (or anyone outside WotC) has the business information on hand to know for sure.

I said "think" and "suspect".

But I'll also go further and say that, still my opinion here, if this level of splitting the fan base and ill will amongst former fans was party of WotC's plan all along, then WotC's plan was stupid. I'd rather think they miscalculated than were intentionally divisive. But, as you correctly point out, only they have the information to know for sure.

 

[El Mahdi]

...We may spend hours and hours doing mathematical analysis to determine a build's average damage output, but we don't do the same for how the people who print the game are supposed to pay their mortgages.

Thus Ao's third commandment: "RPG developers do not live by XP alone." - Tablets of Fate, stanza III

 

[innerdude]

How exactly does participating in edition wars accomplish this?

If you have a particular play style, and a rule set more closely approximates the play style you prefer, then as a gamer who wants to maximize their enjoyment of RPGs--by having the broadest available products, by having the widest range of potential game groups--then we ABSOLUTELY have a stake in the edition war, because we want a product that meets that desire.

A. We want other players to see that a particular rule set is fundamentally altering much of the play style we enjoy, so they can be aware that "their way" isn't "the only way" (and of course, we understand that "our way" isn't the "only way" either, we just want "our way" to be just as valid as "any other way").

B. We want the companies that produce the products to know that we will NOT purchase product we dislike, and would hope that future design and production decisions would follow closer to what we want (and if those decisions aren't made, we're not going to buy their products).

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

A. We want other players to see that a particular rule set is fundamentally altering much of the play style we enjoy, so they can be aware that "their way" isn't "the only way" (and of course, we understand that "our way" isn't the "only way" either, we just want "our way" to be just as valid as "any other way").

I wish I could take this at face value and I'm not going to accuse you particularly.....BUT, many of this type of discussion leads down a road where fans of whatever edition try to share how one can achieve their style of play using the edition they are saying can't accomodate them. Said people them get defensive and deny that anything can ever make said edition able to accomodate their style.

I'm extremely curious to see the results of Dark Sun and Gamma World. These two setting veer far from the style of standard 4E D&D. I've always thought the game could be taken into different styles quite easily* and here's the testing ground for whether WotC can pull it off.

*I even have the seed rolling around in my head for an Indiana Jones one-shot using the 4E framework.