D&D 4E Who else is going to be a deserter when 4e comes out?

[BryonD]

I can't believe that of all people, I'm defending the line of reasoning you are condemning. The problem is not that WotC will be releasing a new game. The problem is that so many people have so much invested with 3rd edition that they may not be willing to abandon it because WotC decides to hit the reset button.

Yep.

There has been a lot of focus on what impact a hypothetical 4E would have on the OGL.
I think the OGL would have a larger impact on 4E than the other way around.

If 4E were not backward compatible it would face an obstacle to conversion that pretty much no RPG game has ever encountered before.

There will always be the "boycott the greedy jerks" contingent. I'm not part of that at all. More power to them, get rich guys, I'm pulling for ya!!!!
But if 4E doesn't fit with what I've already got I just don't see any reason to bother.

Unless its just mind-blowing awesome. (Which it won't be)

 

[Turjan]

Why must you always be so damned reasonable?

Truly, I'll probably buy the player's handbook. But I've got thousands of dollars invested in the current edition, so unless any new edition that might materialize is completely compatible, I won't be buying more than that. I've already got enough stuff to last me three lifetimes, let alone the this one.

Same here. I will most probably buy the PHB, because I'm curious and $20-30 are nothing to get upset about. However, I have a sizable 3.x library, and I'm pretty comfortable with it, given the flexibility introduced by the likes of Arcana Unearthed or Grim Tales. I noticed that I don't buy any new books that only update some 3.0 book (except the 3 core books). This goes even that far that I didn't buy "Races of Stone" because I have "Hammer & Helm". There's some kind of psychological barrier that I don't cross. Buying the new version makes me feel like throwing the money away I spent for the predecessor. That may be the reason why already 3.5 hit my spending brake. Which isn't the worst thing .

 

[the black knight]

Dude, there are some wicked short term memories around here. When the revision was released, Monte himself revealed to the online community that it had been planned all along.
3.5 was a money grab from the beginning. They can sell it six ways to Sunday, but it was.

Will 4e be any different? Well, let's see. We've had 3.5 for two years now. I would say a majority of people seem content with the system, so the question is: how many different approaches are they going to use to convince us it's broken before 4e is released?

 

[Turjan]

Dude, there are some wicked short term memories around here. When the revision was released, Monte himself revealed to the online community that it had been planned all along.

In order to complete what Monte said, he mentioned it was planned for 5 years after the 3.0 release at the earliest. With only minor corrections.

Just regarding short term memories .

 

[Pants]

Dude, there are some wicked short term memories around here. When the revision was released, Monte himself revealed to the online community that it had been planned all along.
3.5 was a money grab from the beginning. They can sell it six ways to Sunday, but it was.

Why do people keep twisting poor Monte's comments from the Nine Hells to Ysgard...?

Do you want to know what Monte really said? http://www.montecook.com/arch_review26.html

The idea, they assured us, was to make a revised edition that was nothing but a cleanup of any errata that might have been found after the book's release, a clarification of issues that seemed to confuse large numbers of players, and, most likely, all new art. It was slated to come out in 2004 or 2005, to give a boost to sales at a point where -- judging historically from the sales trends of previous editions -- they probably would be slumping a bit. It wasn't to replace everyone's books, and it wouldn't raise any compatibility or conversion issues.

It was initially planned as an incorporation of errata and small revisions (which 3.0 did need!). Obviously, somewhere down the line, this changed.

 

[Darrin Drader]

Why do people keep twisting poor Monte's comments from the Nine Hells to Ysgard...?

It's the perils of being a personality in this (or any) industry that involves the public and fans. When you talk, people may quote you to prove their point. This is especially true about Monte since he's, well.... he's Monte. He wrote the DMG, he's the founder and proprietor at Malhavoc, and he's arguably one of the most gifted game designers in the business. When Monte talks, people listen.

 

[Ranger REG]

So I have read rumors and speculations from a guy who was at gencon and spoke with important people (thread on the wizards boards, I don't know where exactly), that WotC are trying to terminate many of the D&D settings lines, including Greyhawk, so to just have Eberron and FR when 4e is released (as the speculation goes), in 2007.

Despite that I'm a Realms fan, I'm prepared for the end of a pretty good run. In fact, I have to accept that WotC may not do a Kara-Tur book for 3.5e before 4e come out and no FR products will be published by then from them.

 

[Angel Tarragon]

I'll only buy the core books and will be extremely nitpicky about other products, unlike I am now. I thoroughly enjoy the D20 system, so if it gets abandoned, I'll wash my hands with 4th and any future editions, only acquiring the PHB, DMG and MM, then I'll be done.

 

[Maggan]

So will I

I'll only buy the core books and will be extremely nitpicky about other products, unlike I am now. I thoroughly enjoy the D20 system, so if it gets abandoned, I'll wash my hands with 4th and any future editions, only acquiring the PHB, DMG and MM, then I'll be done.

That's my take as well.

The funny thing is, then WotC is happy enough. Since they get the most money from sales of the PH, DMG and MM, since we'll be getting them, WotC get the sales they need.

/M

 

[WizarDru]

The problem is that so many people have so much invested with 3rd edition that they may not be willing to abandon it because WotC decides to hit the reset button.

But there seems to be a default assumption that the hypothetical 4e will be a radical departure from 3e, and that they won't be readily compatible. I don't accept that as truth, or even likely. Any 4e that does appear, IMHO, will be an incremental change with errata...not unlike 3.5. You can still use 3.0 material in 3.5 with a minimum of fuss....something I find myself doing often, because the ELH needs conversion. Yes, there are changes all over the place...but I didn't have Tasha's Hideous Laughter memorized under 3e, for example, so the changes to 3.5 version aren't exactly earth-shattering.

I'm not saying I don't appreciate what you're saying...I just don't think the differences will be so drastic as to be a significant negative impact on sales.

Side note: If you want to enjoy some real comedy, go to google and search the newsgroups for old pre-3e discussions on r.g.f.dnd and how 3e was going to kill us all. The claims by the naysayers then makes for some high comedy, in retrospect.