log in or register to remove this ad

 

4E Where was 4e headed before it was canned?


log in or register to remove this ad

Parmandur

Legend
No, they didn't but one factoid to make it out of TSR - according to some WotC insider, I think, was that the Basic set was the biggest selling D&D book of all time, 1.2 mil - units, not $ - is what's stuck in my mind, but I'll admit to a dodgey memory at this point in my life.
No, absolutely, that's right: my point is, how many people just stuck with Basic.
 
Last edited:


Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
Or Dangerous Journeys.
I can't help but thinking that 2e'd've been better with him on board, though.
hmmm I think he had D&D the way he wanted it to be truthful not sure his contribution would have worked in a game which was being structured to be a toolset.
 

Zardnaar

Legend
No, they didn't but one factoid to make it out of TSR - according to some WotC insider, I think, was that the Basic set was the biggest selling D&D book of all time, 1.2 mil - units, not $ - is what's stuck in my mind, but I'll admit to a dodgey memory at this point in my life.
I don't think anyone knows the red box exact figures. 1 million to 1.5 million seems to be the most common range.

1E phb hit 1.5 million but that was over 12 years. The red box was selling something like 100k a month so I assume most if the sales occured in a year or two, even the later black boxes hit 500k. The BECMI family outsold 3.0, 3.5 and Pathfinder put together and you can probably add 4E to the list as well.

I think Tony Vargas had the best speculation if 4E had been better recieved. I think they were scrapping the bottom of the barrel for class design, but there was higher level stuff, different settings, and outer planar stuff to do.
 
Last edited:

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Do, not, bother.

You'll only get more edition warring bait (however passive, cold).

[MENTION=7005485]Mycroft[/MENTION] - Dude, *you* were the one who started the trash talking, in the 4th post in the thread. Claiming others are edition warring, when you have the first salvo, is not a good look. You probably need to stop pointing fingers at others, and examine your own position more closely.

To help you do that, let me give you some extra time - don't post in this thread again. Spend the time you would have used here on a journey of self-exploration, or something.

Everyone else: We are okay with folks engaging in thoughtful analysis of past games, but decade+ old acrimony is not going to end well. Is that clear? If not, take your questions about how you really want to treat folks badly to PM or e-mail, and we can discuss it.
 

Parmandur

Legend
I don't think anyone knows the red box exact figures. 1 million to 1.5 million seems to be the most common range.

1E phb hit 1.5 million but that was over 12 years. The red box was selling something like 100k a month so I assume most if the sales occured in a year or two, even the later black boxes hit 500k. The BECMI family outsold 3.0, 3.5 and Pathfinder put together and you can probably add 4E to the list as well.
Precisely: while the Basic Set was the big seller, followed probably by the Expert Set, they published Basic specific products for years, that appear to have done pretty well in their own right.

I think Tony Vargas had the best speculation if 4E had been better recieved. I think they were scrapping the bottom of the barrel for class design, but there was higher level stuff, different settings, and outer planar stuff to do.
Yeah, that sounds about right.
 

No, absolutely, that's right: my point is, how many people just stuck with Basic.
IDK. We are talking a product that was being sold in mainstream outlets like Toys R Us, so it doesn't seem unreasonable that there could, indeed, have seen a lot of Basic Set sales that never led to anything else. But I have never heard a statistic on that.

Over a somewhat longer period, it seems, the 1e PH also sold over a mil. But, those are single-product comparisons (and, really, /many/ of those buying a PH probably bought a Basic Set, first, I mean Basic->Advanced is a very obvious upgrade path, intended or not).

Haven't heard anything concrete about eXpert or later 'ECMI' sets or the Rules Cyclopedia, though. Until 5e, no WotC-era D&D book came close to those million+ numbers of the fad-years Basic Set or PH, with WotC giving numbers in the hundreds of thousands, when they didn't just go for vague 'ooh, even better than we expected' or 'very strong' marketing speak. ;)
 


Mistwell

Legend
I personally wanted to see more of the Essentials line. I loved it. It gave me more of what I wanted out of the game than the Core line did.
 

I think Tony Vargas had the best speculation if 4E had been better recieved. I think they were scrapping the bottom of the barrel for class design, but there was higher level stuff, different settings, and outer planar stuff to do.
I'm reminded of a question I just asked a PF fan in one of the PF2 threads - is there really any character concept you couldn't build in PF1 with all that's out already? I mean, prior to 4e PH3, you /couldn't/ play a psionic, but you could probably have played a character concept a whole lot like you could with RunePriest, already. So, I think, hypothetical PH4+ would have had to have stuck to new classes within the Source they introduced, only, there just wasn't much need for more classes in an already filled 'grid.'
And, if HoS and HotEC were any indication, they were not having an easy time coming up with /concepts/, never mind classes, to fill out the Shadow & Elemental sources. By PH6-9 they might've seriously regretted folding Ki into Psionics, 'orientalism' notwisthstanding.

Err we actually stretch a lot I think to figure out "what" they might have been the product release rate in 4e was downright unparallelled a lot was already covered.
Realistically, the direction it started in wasn't sustainable - no edition of any essentially 'list based' system is, but so much, so fast, really wasn't. Mechanically, it was sound enough to handle more and more options, clustered around new Sources, in the PH format. DMs could have, instead of the old Core Only rubric, limited the options in their game by choosing a handful of sources to allow in their campaigns, based on the setting concept. The Athas was Martial, Arcane & Psionic, for the obvious instance.

But, realistically, it'd've had to've, if not reverse direction like Essentials & 5e, at least change direction or emphasis. Perhaps, like post-E did towards the end with HotFW, towards developing more 'Lore' over mechanics? So, more setting information rather than setting crunch, and more adventures.
 

Remathilis

Legend
There was talk of a Ravenloft game, either as a standalone or as the next setting, which allowed you to play as vampires and werewolves, which to me totally missed the point of Ravenloft as a setting. I think that is where the Heros of Shadow vampire class came from though.
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
Perhaps, like post-E did towards the end with HotFW, towards developing more 'Lore' over mechanics? So, more setting information rather than setting crunch, and more adventures.
But yes it was the quality presentation and inclusion of lore and flavor along side the willingness to do new things within the same structure, which I like - are you sure a new thing couldn't have been our martial controller... or crunch with some experimental factor hmmm how about opening large races like Centaurs (probably could have gone in HotFW).
 

are you sure a new thing couldn't have been our martial controller...
Pretty sure, yeah.
There seemed zero impetus after the PH to add martial classes or complete the martial 'grid' - indeed, the whole "we're not just grid-filling here" thing was strictly in response to 'hey, no martial controller?' because there was nothing else missing from said metaphorical grid at the time.

I think we'd've seen all 4 roles covered by Shadow & Elemental, with full classes, if the 4e direction had continued. So, PH4 might've had, say Assassin(Striker, w/'Shrouds' - obviously, it was already in DDI), Illusionist*(controller), Necromancer*(leader), & IDK Doomguard or something, just because (I mean, I'd've never imagined the Warden before they pulled that out of nowhere to stand at the corner of Primal & Defender). PH5 Elemental could've just been, by, well, element, since there's 4 of em: Earth(defender), Water (leader), Air (controller), and Fire (striker) - they could've gone full-'bender on us, or, like I feel HotEC kinda did, a bit, rip off Jim Butcher's Allera.


* before HotFL, there weren't wizard 'specialists' like the Illusionist, Necromancer, Abjurer, etc... so I'd feel OK misappropriating the names for hypothetical purposes. A Shadow-Source illusionist wouldn't be a wizard specializing in illusions spells, but a shadow-caster who uses the interplay of light and shadow to deceive the senses. A Shadow Necromancer wouldn't be an arcane specialist, but would channel the dark powers of undeath associated with the Shadowfell… to empower his allies and even make them rise & keep fighting when apparently slain...
 
Last edited:


hbarsquared

Quantum Chronomancer
On this note... When did development of 5e really start? I remember seeing online articles about house rules and spitballing and "bringing D&D back to its roots" around the time of Essentials.

When was the first hint?
 

Scott Nagel

First Post
I have vague recollections that WOTC had announced a Nentir Vale book and a "new" PHB that had errata-ed versions of the 4 core classes and the Warlord. Does anyone remember that? Were there other indicators as to where WOTC wanted 4e to go before deciding D&D needed a new edition?
I am late finding this thread, but Chapters, the largest chain of bookstores here in Canada, still has product listings for a few 4e books that were never released:

https://www.chapters.indigo.ca/en-ca/books/gazeteer-the-nentir-vale-a/9780786957668-item.html?ikwsec=Books&ikwidx=30

[url]https://www.chapters.indigo.ca/en-ca/books/players-handbook-races-humans-a/9780786955503-item.html?ikwsec=Books&ikwidx=35

[/URL]
 

Sacrosanct

Legend
On this note... When did development of 5e really start? I remember seeing online articles about house rules and spitballing and "bringing D&D back to its roots" around the time of Essentials.

When was the first hint?
2012. Announced in August, so I’m sure there were discussions a few months prior
 

Parmandur

Legend
On this note... When did development of 5e really start? I remember seeing online articles about house rules and spitballing and "bringing D&D back to its roots" around the time of Essentials.

When was the first hint?
They announced the Next process in early January of 2012, and it seems the decision to give up the ghost and start fresh happened over the course of 2011.
 

On this note... When did development of 5e really start? I remember seeing online articles about house rules and spitballing and "bringing D&D back to its roots" around the time of Essentials.

When was the first hint?
I don't think it'd be unfair to say that Essentials was early 5e development. Kinda like how people point to Bo9S or Star Wars SAGA as early experiments in 4e, or how I expect they'll point to Starfinder as presaging PF2.

You can also see the pace of release rapidly decelerate through the post-E run, indicative of losing resources and/or shifting development resources to pre-5e/Next.
 

Mythological Figures & Maleficent Monsters

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top