Why 4e is a good thing (even if you hate it)

[Glade Riven]

One thing that I've noticed since 4e has come out, is that it really has expanded the horizons of gamers. There are a lot more people interested in other systems besides 3.5 and 4e, where as before 4e's release d20 had pretty much conquered the market.

This is especially a good thing for the industry, as WotC broke their own semi-monopoly on role-playing - and still making a profit off of 4e. 4e is a system that lets some fresh meat into the hobby - and some of these people who start in 4e will branch out into other RPGs.

That, and Pathfinder wouldn't be what it is without 4e.

 

[Umbran]

There are a lot more people interested in other systems besides 3.5 and 4e, where as before 4e's release d20 had pretty much conquered the market.

Well, I think all those folks who enjoy GURPS and White Wolf and so many other games will have more than a little trouble with this basic premise.

We don't have any real numbers on market penetration for any of these games. However, I don't expect 4e has substantially increased the market share for non-D&D games. d20 still dominates the market.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Yeah, sans statistics of some kind, I'd hesitantly agree with Umbran. Or be tempted to.

Besides, d20 wasn't ever really that dominant, I believe. It was often claimed to be so on the internet, by those with a stake in some other system(s) and/or those who simply strongly disliked it. But otherwise, as far as I could tell, nobody (else) noticed this 'takeover' or whatever, IRL.

F'rex, not the FLGS owner I knew then (and still know.)

And I don't think d20 (as opposed to D&D itself) is any more so now. Possibly not much less so either. No idea.

 

[Dausuul]

So, what you're saying is that Wizards' decision to move away from the OGL for 4E has dealt a severe blow to the d20 market, creating an opening for non-d20 games?

I can get behind that thesis, although like other posters I'd want to see some hard numbers before embracing it. But it's kind of like saying, "The Black Death was a good thing because it created a massive labor shortage and gave the surviving peasants leverage to demand greater freedoms and legal rights." I mean, yeah, that was a positive outcome of the Black Death, but still...

 

[Scribble]

It DID seem like for a while everyone was tempted to make every new game that came out based on the d20 system...

But I think that started changing before 4e.

I for one am happy to see the change. While I enjoy the d20 system, I also like seeing new systems and ideas.


What I think people should be happy about 4e for is it's at this point that WoTC seems to be finally working on really growing the market / updating the game's public image. Since they ARE the top dog so to speak, this is their job, like it or not. They're the owners of the "flagship" RPG, so they're the ones that have the ability to realy draw in lots of new gamers.

They should have been doing this for the past 10 years, but I'm happy to see them putting some real effort into it now.

 

[Kafen]

But I think that started changing before 4e.

The changes to the STL would be my best guess as to the primary force behind the shift to non d20 logo games going by pure guess work. Each change/crisis of the STL pretty much heralded the design of 'in house' game systems among the large publishers.

 

[Umbran]

Besides, d20 wasn't ever really that dominant, I believe. It was often claimed to be so on the internet, by those with a stake in some other system(s) and/or those who simply strongly disliked it. But otherwise, as far as I could tell, nobody (else) noticed this 'takeover' or whatever, IRL.

Oh, I'm pretty sure the claim to dominance is reasonable. I've seen no sign that D&D has ever had what you'd call effective competition in the tabletop RPG market.

 

[Piratecat]

Besides, d20 wasn't ever really that dominant, I believe.

Oh, I thoroughly disagree. As an ENnies judge for several of those years, let me say that the non-d20 products were few and far between. WotC recognizes this as well; when I spoke to Bill Slaviscek last summer, he mentioned (from my notes):

If Bill has a regret about 3rd edition, d20, it’s that they got rid of all the other roleplaying games. That wasn’t the intent, but he misses going to the game store and seeing what FASA did that day. He's pleased that it's now swinging back the other way.​

 

[Scribble]

Oh, I thoroughly disagree. As an ENnies judge for several of those years, let me say that the non-d20 products were few and far between. WotC recognizes this as well; when I spoke to Bill Slaviscek last summer, he mentioned (from my notes):

If Bill has a regret about 3rd edition, d20, it’s that they got rid of all the other roleplaying games. That wasn’t the intent, but he misses going to the game store and seeing what FASA did that day. He's pleased that it's now swinging back the other way.​

I've been wracking my brain trying to think of any systems that came out and made any kind of splash between 2000 and 2006-7ish that weren't d20 or d20 based...

Maybe it's just me.. but anyone?

 

[ggroy]

I've been wracking my brain trying to think of any systems that came out and made any kind of splash between 2000 and 2006-7ish that weren't d20 or d20 based...

Maybe it's just me.. but anyone?

Perhaps not huge splashes:

- New World of Darkness
- Runequest (Mongoose)