When did I stop being WotC's target audience?

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

1) Who called it a "conspiracy theory"? I, in the post I linked, was expressing my reasons to fear the shape of 4e. And in retrospect, it seems I was right.
2) The designer confessed it, but you disagree with us? So, you disagree with the designer?

That had me wondering for a while to - what he means is that he disagrees with the idea its a conspiracy theory since it was said out in the open. I am not sure anyone called it directly conspiracy theory (I think Hussar might have, but I am to lazy to go back now), but, well. In a way it always comes off as such as long nothing is backing it up. But there is stuff backing it up.

 

[DaveMage]

1) Who called it a "conspiracy theory"? I, in the post I linked, was expressing my reasons to fear the shape of 4e. And in retrospect, it seems I was right.
2) The designer confessed it, but you disagree with us? So, you disagree with the designer?

Hmmm....I think he was actually agreeing with you.

(And thanks for that post, Windjammer - yet another reason why 4E is unappealing to me - I don't do tournament play.)

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

That said, I'm sure they're learning from this experience, and I wouldn't be too shocked if the next "wave" of supplements tried to bring in to the game exactly what some people are complaining isn't in there. I expect a concentration of fluff and old-school-ness to pop up in a year or two once they have time to form and publish a reaction. It won't be crazy, it won't reject 4e's assumptions, but it will try as much as possible to work within them.

This is very possibly true; WoTC folks have often said that books are in prep well over a year before they come out, so any feedback from the 4E release will not show up in products until fall of '09 at the earliest.

I personally would be thrilled if this happens. There is a LOT about 4E that I like, but the things I dislike are prevalent enough that they keep me from buying in (primarily I'm talking about the powers system).

RE: 4E design and the RPGA - It resonates with me that with the way the RPGA is set up, and the kind of events that are run, if WoTC is using them as their primary focus group they're going to end up creating a game that is less likely to appeal to me.

And now a note from your friendly neighborhood moderator:

Lets drop the accusations of trolling and lying and of frothing communities of hate. This thread is wobbling around in a generally decent direction, but the last few pages have veered off into some mean-spiritedness. Lets nip that now. Thanks!

 

[AllisterH]

I think the recent posts highlight "WHEN" the change went over.

I fully suspect it wasn't JUST the RPGA driving the changes but also my hunch that the wider audience no longer has the time to spend on D&D. If D&D isn't a "pickup and play" game, chances are you won't generate enough interest for players to actually play an entire campaign across the years.

 

[Sunderstone]

You know, considering that you have a history of assuming people are "trolls", I don't think you are in the best position to judge others for making assumptions about people's goals and motivations.

^this
and Im not a Hater as well.

That said, its the nature of the beast on a public forum. On other forums like in WoW People will often create forum "alts" to hide behind because they feel they might get flamed on their opinions if they post on their "mains". Often times, their "mains" are respected members of the community and they dont wish to disrespect other members of their guilds by posting forum drama.

Im not saying that im the alt poster above, Im not. I dont feel the need to hide here. But I do think that this forum like most other forums tend to slant a certain way and my opinions might receive nothing more than flames. Its normal.

I do think he/she may have gotten the point across without being so hard on Ari. I like Ari's work too, but I can see where some of this may be coming from.
First off I doubt Ari as a "freelancer" has access to WotC's true numbers. Second, I doubt WotC would tell us if their "baby" wasnt selling as well as it should. After all, it was WotC that went on and on about how our game was broken and 4E was going to be so much better, etc, etc. so that they could sell us on the new hotness that is 4E. I doubt they would tell us if it didnt sell as well as they thought it would. Again this is all my opinion.

As for someone getting hammered because of his "grain of salt" comment, Im in the same boat. I see it as any developer "freelance" or otherwise, might have a slant on his/her opinions because they want to keep getting work from the big fish in the pond that is WotC. Its no secret that folks at WotC visit this site. If I was looking for work with WotC, id try to sell it as well. I could care less if I preferred 3.5 If I thought 4E work would pay my bills. My personal game would remain 3.5, while I developed for 4E to keep paying my bills.

Again, Im not saying Ari is lying. He may like 4E and be vocal about it for genuine reasons. Im glad hes enjoying it. Ill continue to take any comments from any developer with a grain of salt regardless.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

Again, Im not saying Ari is lying. He may like 4E and be vocal about it for genuine reasons. Im glad hes enjoying it. Ill continue to take any comments from any developer with a grain of salt regardless.

As we should. I don't think that it's a slight against Mouse that some of us are STILL LISTENING TO HIM but then tempering what he's saying with the fact that he's a very vocal proponent of 4E and a freelancer for WOTC.

 

[Sunderstone]

As we should. I don't think that it's a slight against Mouse that some of us are STILL LISTENING TO HIM but then tempering what he's saying with the fact that he's a very vocal proponent of 4E and a freelancer for WOTC.

Agreed.

 

[jdrakeh]

You know, considering that you have a history of assuming people are "trolls", I don't think you are in the best position to judge others for making assumptions about people's goals and motivations.

Typically, those weren't assumptions, but observations based on posts that constitute trolling at pretty much every website under the sun. I mean, unless posting threads with such topical commentary as "X edition sucks ass and you're all 3etards/4orns/WotC tools!" isn't trolling.

[Edit: Kid Charlegmagne, I just saw your post after responding to Psion and assume that it was directed at me because of the "communities of frothing hate" remark, despite my not accusing anybody specific of trolling or lying. I shall refrain from posting further to this thread, despite my misgivings.]

 

[billd91]

Heh, this is a little idea that's been bouncing around in my head since before 4e hit the shelves. I look at it like this:

• 4e was playtested by the RPGA
• Many of the changes done in late 3e were informed by RPGA play
• While I don't think 4e gets in the way of world building, it doesn't really help that much either - and since RPGA play doesn't require world building....
• The DDI VTT will be a huge draw for the RPGA
• Very exacting language
• Very concerned by class balance
• Ejecting races that were ... underplayed
• Including races that were more played (Hey, it's not a secret why the Iconics for Paizo's Age of Worms included a Tiefling)
• Expanded rules for covering role play experience awards
• Streamlining rules to allow easier DMing

There's likely more, but that's what I can think of right now.

So, to me, if 4e turns you off, it's likely because you weren't a target for RPGA play either. Or, rather, you don't play like people play in the RPGA. If you like 4e, likely your playstyles were more in keeping with how the RPGA functioned at the table.

Honestly, from a corporate standpoint, I think WOTC's idea is full of win. If they can hook just 10% of the RPGA into the DDI VTT, that's about 15000 players. That's a smidgeon under 3000 groups, or to put it another way, an RPGA game starting every 5 minutes 24/7. That's a massive draw for D&D. If this works, they've solved the issues with physically getting groups together. And they'll make a ton of money doing it as well.

There are some elements of the playtested by the RPGA/informed by the RPGA that I would take with a grain of salt. For one thing, 3e was largely playtested by the RPGA as well, so that's not exactly a new influence.

As far as things being influenced by the RPGA, it's a useful forum for figuring out how a character's mechanics work and don't work divorced from a regular game environment. A regular game, with a consistent bunch of players, has a dynamic quite a bit different from a game with a scratch group of players from all over the region at a Con. A DM of a regular game can make adjustments because Mark doesn't like that kind of encounter, or Vicki always hangs back and sneaks around despite not being well-built for it, while Glenn is a huge powergamer. A con DM probably doesn't know his players very well and can't plan for such allowances. And the same goes for the individual players. As a result, each player is going to have to be able to stand on his own and that's going to reinforce any pressure coming from regular groups to make each PC as individually balanced against every other PC.

As far as exacting language and streamlining, I think the old rules forum around here and the arguments of RAW vs RAI is argument enough that improvement in that area would always be welcome. The more clarity in the rules, the less likely they will be misinterpeted, the fewer rule arguments and less lawyering, and the more uniform the D&D experience.... as far as the rules go. That would be a plus for Con-style gaming and, in fact, has been a goal of AD&D since the 1st edition came out. The idea there was to provide more structure and codification than the more table-idiosyncratic D&D so that the game could have that more consistent play experience and, by working over the rules in a consistent fashion, actually become progressively better.

 

[Shadeydm]

Well that was quite a read.

To the OP: you are not alone in the feeling of being left behind by the current direction of the game. FWIW I am 40 and have played and DMed every edition since ADnD.

I own the core 4E set mainly because of how deeply discounted it was on Amazon but also out of curiosity. I have played about 8-10 4E sessions as a player and they were all fun and yes they all felt like playing DnD perhaps a very different flavor of the game but still DnD.

Since the group is pretty pumped about 4E it looks like the game I will be playing for the forseeable future but I doubt I will ever run the game or buy anymore books. In the end I both enjoy the style of, and respect the skills of the other DMs in the group so I am sure things will continue to be fun.

I doubt WotC intentionally left us behind, instead I believe they remade the game in an image that they believed would have as wide an appeal as they could. Not a conspiracy just a way to make more money which is what they get paid to do in the end.

Personally, I just hope they find a way to bring those left behind back into the fold. Who knows, perhaps with the next edition. Either way just keep playing DnD and having fun with your friends after all thats really what its all about anyways.