D&D 4E Will 4E be announced at D&D Experience?

[Psion]

You wouldn't, because you can release a 3.0 to 3.5 magnitude revision under the guise of a "Rules Compendium,"

Heh.

I don't buy that.

Can you work some necessary revisions into the game? Yes.

Will it be the "make everything invalid" effect that 3.5 had, that included numerous and often nonsensical revisions to spells, feats, and classes? No. They don't have room.

I think the Q&A should make clear one thing: the economy that is driving D&D isn't the old "new edition" economy. It's the minis economy.

 

[hong]

Eyebeams is trolling. Hi, Eyebeams!

 

[ShinHakkaider]

Aside from that, you think for a company that's touting D&D Experience as Macworld for D&D would drop a lot of big surprises on us.

The D&D Experience will never be MacWorld because the Mac faithful are exactly that, faith ful. They love, most things Mac. D&D gamers, if this board is any indication, are fickle at best and seem more interested in putting WOTC on blast than helping to spread the gospel of D&D.

I like D&D, I'm also a Mac user. You can't pull me away from my computer during a MAcworld announcement. I usually like talking to other mac users about mac stuff, other gamers not so much.

 

[eyebeams]

Heh.

I don't buy that.

Can you work some necessary revisions into the game? Yes.

Will it be the "make everything invalid" effect that 3.5 had, that included numerous and often nonsensical revisions to spells, feats, and classes? No. They don't have room.

I think the Q&A should make clear one thing: the economy that is driving D&D isn't the old "new edition" economy. It's the minis economy.

The "minis economy" doesn't rely on the D&D *RPG.* If it did, WotC would sell minis under a model designed to support the RPG and the minis handbook would be the "4th corebook" it was originally presented as at GTS 2003 (how soon people forget . . .).

But the Rules Compendium is supposed to include revisions culled from Sage Advice and other sources, which makes it just as much of a core update as 3.5. The fact that changes to the D20 engine can be expressed more succintly than individual plugins like classes and spells doesn't change the significance of it. If it's "necessary," then it becomes a major release that many, many people will buy, extending the life of the RPG.

It is interesting that WotC is conflating the minis and RPG ends of the brand when presenting info, though. This matches Hasbro's 2005 annual and 2006 4th Q reports, which barely mention D&D and emphasize WotC as a cards, minis and book publishing concern.

 

[eyebeams]

The D&D Experience will never be MacWorld because the Mac faithful are exactly that, faith ful. They love, most things Mac. D&D gamers, if this board is any indication, are fickle at best and seem more interested in putting WOTC on blast than helping to spread the gospel of D&D.

I like D&D, I'm also a Mac user. You can't pull me away from my computer during a MAcworld announcement. I usually like talking to other mac users about mac stuff, other gamers not so much.

It's just a matter of presentation. I worked for Apple a few years back. I discovered that Mac "fans" complain about the company continuously. Conversely, talking about D&D's financial prospects in anything less than positive terms is often seen as some kind of gamer treachery around these parts. I think it balances out.

As for a D&D "MacWorld" the problem is that Apple makes about a gajillion dollars more and new products thus qualify as a major cultural event with broad reporting to non-Mac users, while no non-gamer media has cared about D&D since 3.0 came out.

 

[Psion]

The "minis economy" doesn't rely on the D&D *RPG.* If it did, WotC would sell minis under a model designed to support the RPG and the minis handbook would be the "4th corebook" it was originally presented as at GTS 2003 (how soon people forget . . .).

It's certainly part of it. Why do you think they are sticking to encounters in published adventures that are supported by the minis set?

But the Rules Compendium is supposed to include revisions culled from Sage Advice and other sources, which makes it just as much of a core update as 3.5.

No, it really doesn't. But to be "as much much of a core update as 3.5", it would have to be, you know, as much of an update as 3.5. Sage advice articles typically don't include changes to the scope of "oh, by the way, all curses are now necromancy and all teleportation is conjuration", things that showed up in 3.5. No, by way of comparison, Sage Advice is nips and tucks.

The best I think we can expect is clarification of presentation and minor errata. Which we did have in 3.5, but that was only a small part of it. I would be severely surprised if anything showed up in 3.5 that was churn-inducing, which is the fundamental fact when you invoke the phrase "as much of a change as 3.5 was."

 

[eyebeams]

It's certainly part of it. Why do you think they are sticking to encounters in published adventures that are supported by the minis set?

Because it's a marketing ploy that costs the company nothing and encourages RPG players to pick up minis, and not minis players to play the RPG. Read Hasbro's annual and quarterly reports some time. The D&D RPG is greatly downplayed. WotC profits are attributed to cards, minis and publishing, not the D&D RPG per se. If anything, its relationship with the brand is becoming more like the difference between comic book characters as brands and the comics they appear in. I don't think it's at Marvel's level where comics provide 2% of the income or anything, though.

No, it really doesn't. But to be "as much much of a core update as 3.5", it would have to be, you know, as much of an update as 3.5. Sage advice articles typically don't include changes to the scope of "oh, by the way, all curses are now necromancy and all teleportation is conjuration", things that showed up in 3.5. No, by way of comparison, Sage Advice is nips and tucks.

The best I think we can expect is clarification of presentation and minor errata. Which we did have in 3.5, but that was only a small part of it.

This is what I heard about 3.5 when it was trumpeted as being Not a Big Deal in response to grumblings about having to update so soon.

Plus, 160 pages is actually plenty of room when presented with SRD-style brevity, which I think it'll probably do before adding the odd sidebar about how certain rules meant certain things all along.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

D&D needs a Steve Jobs.

Hmm....
Jobs/Gygax
Wozniak/Arneson
Apple I OD&D
Apple II D&D
Mac AD&D

Two guys create something, one guy gets an ego boots the other, then gets booted

Breaks down, as Gygax would have had to return to TSR/WotC to ramp up to 3e/OSX.


D&D does need a visionary, ain't gonna happen unless some nutjob with way too much money threw ton of money at Hasbro to buy it.

 

[Psion]

Because it's a marketing ploy that costs the company nothing and encourages RPG players to pick up minis, and not minis players to play the RPG. Read Hasbro's annual and quarterly reports some time. The D&D RPG is greatly downplayed.

Okay, I'm wondering how this is supposed to contradict my observation that the minis economy is what is driving the car.

Plus, 160 pages is actually plenty of room when presented with SRD-style brevity,

Read the Q&A again. The part about "one rule per page". It's not about brevity, but clarity of presentation and completeness.

 

[eyebeams]

Okay, I'm wondering how this is supposed to contradict my observation that the minis economy is what is driving the car.

It depends on whether you mean, "D&D played with minis," or "the D&D minis game." If it's the latter, sure, but that has little to do with book releases either way.

Frankly, after looking into it I wonder how much of RPG R&D is influenced by the desire to make it look like subsets of more profotable line items. WotC is cards, publishing and minis on the bigger balance sheet; it's role as an RPG company barely registers.

Read the Q&A again. The part about "one rule per page". It's not about brevity, but clarity of presentation and completeness.

Define "one rule per page." A rule isn't a hardwired quantum. Is Trip a rule, is it a subset of maneuvers? What about character conditions? Melee and ranged attacks?