Or more specifically a commentary about how people are reacting to that.

The original article is here, and basically says what we've already heard: WoTC is creating Next as a way to bring back in older gamers.

But what I wanted to talk about is more of the very common response on the interwebs regarding an article like that.  Those comments being:

QuoteI keep hearing this. Seriously, what makes them think it's going to work?

Now, in terms of full disclosure, the person who made that comment has repeatedly admitted that he plays OD&D with no interest of ever playing any edition that's come since, so I'm not sure why he's making that statement because obviously he won't care about Next or any other version.  But I posted it because it's a common statement said my many, many others.

But I think the answer to that is pretty simple.  They think it is going to work because despite the loud gnashers of teeth on certain internet forums, there's plenty of people like me who will probably buy Next.  People like me whose last D&D product I bought was in the 90s.  People like me who have stuck with TSR D&D and not moved on to 3e or 4e, but have played Next and thought, "I actually enjoy this because it allows us to play how we like."

I know I can only speak for myself and one person doesn't mean shit, but I'm pretty confident there are others out there like me based on the G+ hangouts I've been on, and with gamers I've played Next with both in person and in Roll20 who like me, haven't bought a D&D product in over a decade, but probably will with Next.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;647617They think it is going to work because despite the loud gnashers of teeth on certain internet forums, there's plenty of people like me who will probably buy Next.  

But then, this was true of 3e as well. Lots of players of other systems bought at least the PHB thanks to the enormous marketing and the insane pricing of the initial print run. Lots of players who had no inclination to ever play it. (I owned a game store during those days and saw my customers reactions. Another case in point: My standing order for Dragon and Dungeon Magazine reached its all time low before and during 3e.)

All I bought of 3e was the PHB and the first four or five modules. But at that time I had already returned to Mentzer D&D.

So, given the right buzz, 5e might sell considerably well at first. But it's the number of players and return customers that defines success of a game line.

This happens for two combined reasons.
The first reason is that 4e failed more or less to have a long stay in the market.
The second reason is that to launch a new product they need marketing money. Wotc admits 4e's failure to fans and thus capitalizes on the dissent of the fan base towards 4e while launching a public playtest. It is pretty simple: they try to build a marketing campaign for their product with as few money resources as possible. Instead of trying to invest in something new (as they did with 4e and most probably lost their money), they try to capitalize on what they have already. I cant blame them for this.

Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;647637But then, this was true of 3e as well.

When 3e came out, there were lots of people who never bought any D&D stuff for a decade who bought it?  I'll take your word since I didn't pay a lot of attention in 2000.

What I was getting at was that I know a lot of people who haven't bought a D&D book in about 20 years play and enjoy Next, and will most likely buy it when it comes out and play and enjoy it.

QuoteLots of players who had no inclination to ever play it.

I'm talking about people who will play it.  One of the things about the playtests is that we have a pretty good idea how it plays before ever buying the finished product.  I expect some changes, sure, but I don't expect sweeping changes that are so major that they will make us go from buying it to not buying it.  So far the things they've added are pretty easy for us just to ignore.  That means I can play it in a style I like (the quickness of TSR D&D) while offering options I find fun (backgrounds and fighter maneuvers for example).

The "it's like edition X and Y" really is the marketing side of selling Next to past fans of the game. The game itself really is d20 with different tiers of complexity, a reworked feat system and the works. Fundamentally, it's just yet-another-edition, and the treadmill's still on.

What you (Sacrosanct) may not be seeing is that "What makes WotC think Next will bring back players of old editions" and "A lot of people who haven't bought a D&D book in about 20 years will most likely buy Next when it comes out and play and enjoy it" are both correct, because they are coming from different perspectives. You are interpreting "Will it work?" as "Will anyone at all be brought back into the fold?" Old-timers are interpreting "Will it work?" as "Will it bring back everyone, or at least bring back enough to justify all the effort they're making to target old gamers?"

Will it bring back at least some old gamers? Yes, of course.

Will it bring back enough? Probably not.

The reason is because some people don't play 4e because it's locked into one particular "feel" and not enough of the feel of older versions of the game is left to make them want to play, while others don't play because it adds or changes many specific things that they simply do not want. If WotC designs the game to appeal to as many different "feels" as possible, they'll win back the first group, but winning back the second means actually cutting out or changing back a large quantity of things, which WotC is simply not going to do, because then they'd lose all the players they already have, and they'd be bakc where they started.

Quote from: Benoist;647696The "it's like edition X and Y" really is the marketing side of selling Next to past fans of the game. The game itself really is d20 with different tiers of complexity, a reworked feat system and the works. Fundamentally, it's just yet-another-edition, and the treadmill's still on.

It uses the d20 base mechanics, but it plays nothing like 3.x (which has a million modifiers and a dozen attacks each round to keep track of).  And why wouldn't they use the d20 mechanic?  It's a lot more intuitive than looking up a To Hit table or using THAC0.

And yes, of course it's a new edition.  You can't honestly expect them to say, "We've shut down 4e, and decided just to go with AD&D from here on out."


I play TSR D&D because I like combat to move fairly fast, I don't want to be tied to a grid based combat system, and I don't think players should feel limited to what's on their character sheet.  So far, Next has been able to give me the tools to do all of that, as well as adding features I've liked that AD&D doesn't have. Remember, Next is very clear on how to allow players to attempt activities even if they don't have a skill for it.  That is anti-3.x.  And, it's going to be widely supported for the near future until the next version comes along.

Quote from: talysman;647702You are interpreting "Will it work?" as "Will anyone at all be brought back into the fold?" .

No I'm not.  The "What makes them think it will work" is in reference to the team thinking Next will be a success by bringing enough players back, not that will it bring anyone back.

Those are two very different things.  I don't have access to the feedback surveys.  But I imagine they aren't nearly as hostile as comments on internet message boards.  And based on my admittedly anecdotal experience, I've seen  lot of players who haven't touched anything WoTC say they are enjoying Next and will buy and play it going forward.  Based on that, it is not unreasonable for WotC to think that doing it the way they are doing it will in fact be successful.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;647707It uses the d20 base mechanics, but it plays nothing like 3.x (which has a million modifiers and a dozen attacks each round to keep track of).  And why wouldn't they use the d20 mechanic?  It's a lot more intuitive than looking up a To Hit table or using THAC0.

More intuitive to some people, maybe. Not everyone. Adding numbers, no matter how simple, may be harder to some people than looking at a physical table in front of them.

Weird thinking, I know, but this sort of common wisdom that "well adding numbers to a die and comparing it to a target number is way simpler than adding way less modifiers if any to a die and compare it to a value on a table" is bullshit. It depends on people, whether they are visually inclined, math inclined, etc.

Now THAC0 on the other hand can be argued to be more complex because you're not just adding but substracting as well, and that the base Armor Class 0 value may not be as intuitive in itself as comparing a straight addition to a target number/AC. I don't care for THAC0. Never liked it as an ubiquitous mechanic for the game.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;647707And yes, of course it's a new edition.  You can't honestly expect them to say, "We've shut down 4e, and decided just to go with AD&D from here on out."

That's all I'm saying. That the appeal to old edition stuff is just marketing. It's really just all about getting people who might play this or that other iteration to try the new one and hopefully buy into the edition treadmill again.

Quote from: Benoist;647711More intuitive to some people, maybe. Not everyone. Adding numbers, no matter how simple, may be harder to some people than looking at a physical table in front of them.

Weird thinking, I know, but this sort of common wisdom that "well adding numbers to a die and comparing it to a target number is way simpler than adding way less modifiers if any to a die and compare it to a value on a table" is bullshit. It depends on people, whether they are visually inclined, math inclined, etc.

In AD&D you're still doing math.  And when you're done doing math, then you look at a table.  Lord help you if you're also using the weapon vs armor table...

Look, I like AD&D.  You know that.  But let's be real here.  It is not an easier system to find out if you hit than a basic d20 system.

QuoteThat's all I'm saying. That the appeal to old edition stuff is just marketing. It's really just all about getting people who might play this or that other iteration to try it and hopefully buy into the edition treadmill again.

Like I've been saying, seeing as how Next has actually implemented a lot of those factors that have kept me playing AD&D instead of 3e or 4e all these years, it's more than just a marketing ploy.

Right now you're sounding like those 4vengers at TBP by actively ignoring how the game is actually structured, only you haven't resorted to the childish hyperbole or namecalling yet.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;647713In AD&D you're still doing math.  And when you're done doing math, then you look at a table.  Lord help you if you're also using the weapon vs armor table...

Well yes, that depends what you are using in the game indeed, and you might not ever have more than a single digit number to add to your roll before the DM (not you player, you don't look at the table yourself, the DM does, which makes things even simpler for you) looks at the table himself.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;647713Look, I like AD&D.  You know that.  But let's be real here.  It is not an easier system to find out if you hit than a basic d20 system.

I know you do like AD&D. I still disagree. It depends on people, which means that YES for some people it will seem and be easier, FOR THEM, and for others that's not the case.

It depends.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;647713Right now you're sounding like those 4vengers at TBP by actively ignoring how the game is actually structured, only you haven't resorted to the childish hyperbole or namecalling yet.

Well no, I'm just pointing out that (A) the idea that adding escalating numbers to a d20 vs. target number is not as "obviously" easier than rolling and then the DM looks at a to-hit table you player don't have to even care about in the first place, contrarily to common wisdom, and that (B) the appeal to older editions (what's the actual topic of conversation here since that's the title of the thread) is in fact PR, and has really not much to do with what the game (as it stands now) actually is, which is, a basic d20 engine with further optional complexity added through Standard and Advanced rules.

After if you get offended by what I'm saying and just keep getting at me for it, it's on you, really.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;647708No I'm not.  The "What makes them think it will work" is in reference to the team thinking Next will be a success by bringing enough players back, not that will it bring anyone back.

Those are two very different things.  I don't have access to the feedback surveys.  But I imagine they aren't nearly as hostile as comments on internet message boards.  And based on my admittedly anecdotal experience, I've seen  lot of players who haven't touched anything WoTC say they are enjoying Next and will buy and play it going forward.  Based on that, it is not unreasonable for WotC to think that doing it the way they are doing it will in fact be successful.

But you see, it *can't* work.

WotC's changes are being made in terms of what the *company* wants or needs, instead of what the *customers* want or need. People who are looking for something different (but not too different) might buy into Next. But if Next is a different game than 0e or 1e/2e or 3e or 4e, it's not going to offer anything the die-hards of those editions need: they have what they need already. If it caters specifically to the needs of one, it will automatically turn off the die-hards of the other editions.

Who WotC is selling to are the people who need an official version of the game who want as many potential players as possible. The problem is: edition die-hards, by definition, do not need that.

You *can't* win them back.

Quote from: Benoist;647715Well no, I'm just pointing out that (A) the idea that adding escalating numbers to a d20 vs. target number is not as "obviously" easier than rolling and then the DM looks at a to-hit table you player don't have to even care about in the first place, contrarily to common wisdom,

I'm afraid this argument is based on a disingenuous premise because on one side (AD&D) you're assuming that there aren't any modifiers in a scenario, but then are comparing it to a scenario in d20 where there are many modifiers.  We both know that the players in AD&D don't just roll, don't do any modifiers, and the DM looks at a table like you're positioning.  A 7th level AD&D character is probably going to have a magical weapon where you have to add a modifier.  Probably also a strength or dexterity score that gives another modifier.  Then another modifier based on situation (are you sneaking?  Is the opponent flanked?  What weapon are you using vs what type of armor does it have?)  There are plenty of modifiers in AD&D.  The difference is that when you're done doing all of those modifiers, then someone has to look at a table.  That's an extra step dude.

Quoteand that (B) the appeal to older editions (what's the actual topic of conversation here since that's the title of the thread) is in fact PR, and has really not much to do with what the game actually is, which is, a basic d20 engine with further optional complexity added through Standard and Advanced rules.

See, this is an example of you doing what the 4vengers are doing.  I've already shown no fewer than two times how this is not true, and yet you have continued to ignore the fact that Next has implemented rules that allow you to play the game the same way it was played in older versions.  That's not just PR.  That's a core aspect of the product.

I'm not offended at all.  I'm just pointing out how in this case, you are being stubborn.

Quote from: talysman;647716But you see, it *can't* work.

WotC's changes are being made in terms of what the *company* wants or needs, instead of what the *customers* want or need. People who are looking for something different (but not too different) might buy into Next. But if Next is a different game than 0e or 1e/2e or 3e or 4e, it's not going to offer anything the die-hards of those editions need: they have what they need already. If it caters specifically to the needs of one, it will automatically turn off the die-hards of the other editions.

Who WotC is selling to are the people who need an official version of the game who want as many potential players as possible. The problem is: edition die-hards, by definition, do not need that.

You *can't* win them back.

And I don't think they are targeting the die hards.  They're targeting a much larger segment.  People like me and my gaming groups (both in person and online) who preferred TSR D&D to WotC D&D but aren't fanatics about it.  And it seems to be working.  A lot of us will play Next.  People like OG and Benoist probably won't.  And that's OK.  But they aren't the people WotC is targeting.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;647717I'm afraid this argument is based on a disingenuous premise because on one side (AD&D) you're assuming that there aren't any modifiers in a scenario, but then are comparing it to a scenario in d20 where there are many modifiers.

Ah, hm. No. That's not what I actually said, no.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;647717We both know that the players in AD&D don't just roll, don't do any modifiers, and the DM looks at a table like you're positioning. A 7th level AD&D character is probably going to have a magical weapon where you have to add a modifier.  Probably also a strength or dexterity score that gives another modifier.  Then another modifier based on situation (are you sneaking?  Is the opponent flanked?  What weapon are you using vs what type of armor does it have?)  There are plenty of modifiers in AD&D.  The difference is that when you're done doing all of those modifiers, then someone has to look at a table.  That's an extra step dude.

Now you're going to tell me what's going on at my game table, I suppose? The fact of the matter is that what I see at my AD&D table is players dealing with very few if no modifiers at all at low level, unless you're playing with weapon specialization, which is already something optional, and weapons vs. armor modifiers, which is something I do not use in my games. At most they'll have modifiers of in the vicinity of +1/+4 derived from a magic weapon and high Strength/Dex the like if they are actually really good at what they're doing (e.g. fighter types, not ALL charater types by far), AND IF they acquired a magic weapon at some point in the first place.

Circumstancial modifiers are added by me DM after the fact after the player declared the result, which then I compare to values on the to-hit table. That's basically what happens at my game table, and I've found it easier on both the players and myself.

These modifiers are unlikely to get out of hand into double-digit territory, as far as to-hit rolls are concerned. And no, people do not casually reach level 7 in my games. They got to survive for that, and that's not a given. Now if you get paladins with +5 holy avengers and 18/00 Strength and Weapon Specialization and all that shit on a regular basis in your games, and regularly start characters at level 7 like it's a piece of cake, okay, I can see how you'd come to that conclusion, but that's not how my games proceed.

Ergo, it depends. Which is all I've been saying from the start.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;647717See, this is an example of you doing what the 4vengers are doing.  I've already shown no fewer than two times how this is not true, and yet you have continued to ignore the fact that Next has implemented rules that allow you to play the game the same way it was played in older versions.  That's not just PR.  That's a core aspect of the product.

Oh come on. You're the one who's insulting me here. I don't need to call you names. We just disagree, and YOU are the one who's getting his panties into a bunch over this disagreement right now. Come on.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;647717I'm not offended at all.  I'm just pointing out how in this case, you are being stubborn.

Stop projecting.

Look. I'll even show you how not stubborn I am about this: I'm just going to drop it because you just can't take the disagreement right now. It's on you, really. It's you who are being stubborn and not letting it go right now. So OK. I'll be the adult here and leave the thread. Bye.