D&D 4E Would 4E be Popular?

[Mythmere1]

Given the sudden trend toward rules-lite settings like Castles and Crusades that seems to have gained a lot of impetus this year, I think D&D is going to be riding out a storm (perhaps one that fits in a teapot - we'll see - but a storm nontheless). D&D won't become more rules-lite because it has now staked out turf as an utterly comprehensive game system.

The upshot is that for the time being, it's probably not the time for WotC to come out with a new edition. They shouldn't shake the branches when a lot of people are already thinking of jumping. Just stay static and wait for that trend to expire as companies fold from lack of experience, and players return to the classic. (in my case, I probably won't return from C&C, but lots of people will eventually return to D&D - as long as they're still familiar with the existing system).

Unless there's some way of pulling in lots of players specifically with a new edition, I'd just keep selling the 3.5 brand for a while.

 

[DaveMage]

(Of course there is always some chance that 4E could do to D&D what Master of Orion 3 did to the MOO line, but I'm assuming that won't be the case)

I really don't want to have to learn a whole different rule set (heck, I still haven't wrapped my brain around the full 3.0/3.5 set yet), and if that's what's required, then I think your possible scenario above would come to fruition.

The other point that I think needs to be stressed regards d20 products (in total). There are many who have campaigns centered around non-WotC 3.0/3.5 campaign settings. That is a large number of people (when taken as a whole - perhaps not by individual settings) that might suddenly be asked to switch to an incompatible ruleset. In that case, I would expect many of those people would say "no thanks."

Would it make a difference to D&D sales? Maybe/maybe not. However, communities like EN World would probably be deeply divided. No fun there.

 

[Umbran]

So I ask the ENWorld hordes: What is 4E going to have to do to either get you to buy it and to smooth over relations with the gamers that aren't going to look upon 4E with anything other than anger?

The basic answer, I expect, is time. Given enough time, nobody is going to gripe about the change.

The more complex answer cannot be given without knowign the content of 4e.

Given the sudden trend toward rules-lite settings like Castles and Crusades that seems to have gained a lot of impetus this year...

Beware "sudden trends". There's usually a better word for them - "fads".

Don't depend at all upon what you hear on these boards about C&C, or any other trend, unless someoen's backing it up with sales data or something similar. We of EN World do not comprise a particularly valid sample of gamers on the whole. What seems like a growing trend if you look at message boards can still be a complete flop in the market as a whole.

 

[The_Universe]

I'll look at the books, if/when they exist, and decide then what I think of them. For me, the third edition were such an improvement over everything I had ever seen from D&D that I could barely imagine it was the same game.

If 4e can do something similar, I'll be happy.

 

[The_Gneech]

While "easy magic" ¹is a sacred cow in D&D, I don't think "equipment outweighs inherent abilities" is. To be honest, I think a rather substantial amount of players (or at least DMs) would prefer it if inherent abilities were the vast majority of character capabilities.

One of the big problems I see with D&D is that in order for an NPC to be a valid challenge to a group of PCs, you have to load him down with magic items. Of course, once the PCs have killed him, they get those items, so you have to load down the next NPC with even more items. This is a cycle I'm not fond of at all.

At low levels, equipment doesn't play that big a role; but once you start getting into mid- and upper-level play, equipment becomes paramount, especially for fighter types. You can't hurt monster X without weapon type Y ... you can't survive two rounds against the insane BAB of monster A without magic armor B. But it's also true for spellcasters ... opponent Q will make every save against your spells unless you have Int-booster R ... you'll run out of spells at a critical juncture in combat unless you have wand W or scrolls G, H, I, J, K, and L, etc.

That's how the character-development engine works, and I realize why it's designed that way, but it's primarily a "gameist" thing, to use Robin Laws' terminology. What good is getting a hoard of gold without something to spend it on? What fighter doesn't want a better sword? Nifty items is one of the types of bait that DMs dangle in front of PCs as a plot hook, after all, and the game system has to work around that. Once Peerless Percy has quested for his Holy Sword, the monsters he faces with it have to beef up to still be a challenge ... which means that the next schlub who comes along to fight that monster must ALSO have a Holy Sword to even stand a chance.

Conan gets around this by having the characters get all kinds of insane class- and level-buffs, and includes a campaign policy of "treasure and equipment can be summarily yoinked by the GM at any time." That suits me and my tastes better, but that's because I'm a Howard fan ... I can easily see Joe Gamer saying, "What? After all the work I went through to get that Atlantean Sword, it got lost in a shipwreck??? Why did I bother to fight the giant gila monster, then?"

-The Gneech

 

[Sigurd]

Very interesting question

I think WOTC had a huge oportunity with 3rd edition. Their acquisition raised interest in the franchise and people were intrigued to see what they would do with the game. I think the OGL and 3rd edition were a well done publication of the game but other actions since then have complicated things.

3.5 was a blunder in my books and made them look greedy and uncaring (I don't know that is true). 4th edition is not going to have the friendly reception that 3 did. It will be cut up by everyone who feels they were burned by 3.5. I also think their brand loyalty is a little diluted by the successful game extensions that will look to 'Unearthed Arcana' or Scarred Lands to see if their favourite books are upadating first. Some of the ones that will be out of print will form a permanent reason to not update and play the old rules.

The rules are complicated enough now that I think any 4th edition will have to be simpler. If they are simpler and good WOTC will weather the change but if they are more complicated, I think a revision change will be a mistake for them.


S

 

[MerricB]

If 4e is any more of a change than the one between 1e and 2e or 3e and 3.5e I will be very, very surprised.

I know there are corporate scaremongers out there who are saying that "Hasbro is only after your money", but one of the chief ways that Hasbro gets money is by producing games people want to buy.

They don't get money by producing a version of D&D that only two people get, because everyone else stays with 3e.

3e needed to be such a radical shift from old AD&D because it was time. 3e was designed as an expandable system - something AD&D was not designed as. The way 3e was designed allowed Prestige Classes and Feats, and, lo! they were exceptionally popular.

If 4e is radically different from 3e, then all the game loyalty that Wizards have gained will be worthless. However, why would 4e need to be so different? You could see 2e not coping with the options it allowed, but this isn't the case with 3e. Certainly, there are areas that could be improved - and they likely will be in 4e - but there isn't the impetus for an Entirely New System.

What edition is Call of Cthulhu up to now, anyway? How many major structural changes has it had?

4th edition will give Wizards the chance to address the issues in 3e they've discovered (Turn Undead, Metamagic, possibly Monster Races) that weren't addressed in 3.5e, or that were a result of 3.5e.

Consider also that an entirely new system also completely destroys any expertise the Wizards designers have in the system!

So, imagine 3e->3.5e but with slightly more emphasis on some of the main subsystems being tweaked.

From that, you can get an idea as to how 4E will go:

* It will make the 3.5e players happy, because it is similar to that upgrade, and makes the system better.
* Some 3e players will now think that it's long enough since 3e was released, and so they'll upgrade.
* Some 3e players will never want to leave their current system.

(3.5e had one major system overhaul - monster creation - and it made the system much, much cleaner by doing so).

Cheers!

 

[Greatwyrm]

(Of course there is always some chance that 4E could do to D&D what Master of Orion 3 did to the MOO line, but I'm assuming that won't be the case)

Don't even joke about that.

 

[Ranger REG]

Would 4E really be that popular of system?

Now? No.

In 2010-2012 A.D.? Maybe.

 

[Hjorimir]

Like many of the others here, I fear the release of 4e. The current version of the game is so solid I'd be hesitant to let it go. That being said, I cannot help but think of the following quote:

"The significant problems we have cannot be solved at the same level of thinking with which we created them."

-Albert Einstein​

There is always room for improvement. It is a fundamental flaw that humans fear change. It is also fundamental that change is inevitable. Will we be ready? Time will tell.