Quote from: Spinachcat;441260That's energy better spent on high school and college kids who have disposable incomes and interest in new experiences.

This line of thinking confuses me for three reasons:

1) Have you ever seen how much money grown men will sink into their hobbies?  Consider being a sports fan a hobby.  Or the guys who pay a marina fee 12 months a year so they can play with their boats for 12 days a year.  Or hunters who are always buying guns and gear beyond what they need to take a few shots at some game every season.  Or how much video gamers sink into new titles and equipment.  Or friggin' golf.  I'd submit there is plenty of money available to be captured outside of the high school and college demographics.

2) The idea that you need a new edition of D&D for new experiences runs counter to the open-ended nature of the game.  If you need a new edition to have new D&D experiences the problem isn't on the geezers' end.

3) Even if I grant you that a new edition is part of new experiences, then WotC is dis-serving those high school and college kids by keeping old editions out of their hands.  I'm running OD&D Wednesday night for a guy who has never played it.  Have you ever done that?  Or when you say "new experiences" do you really mean "the latest thing that a marketing department tells me is cool"?

Another classic case of "too little, too late".

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:


 :pundit:


"Chinese Democracy" Part II.

:rolleyes:

Quote from: David Johansen;441271It sounds to me like WotC desperately trying to heal the rift they caused.  One can only hope that the genie is truly out of the bottle and the effort is bound to fail.

The only thing I can see that WOTC could do that would actually help heal the wounds would be to re-release all the pdfs of pre-4e material (at no higher than the prices they had before being pulled) on the open market -- that is, not through a "subscription" to something like the DDI. (This would also help their bottom line since every sale would be almost pure profit.) Unless they are going to support the players of previous editions in like this, players of previous editions have no reason to give WOTC the time of day. And definitely no reason to say nice things about WOTC.

I could care less what WOTC does or thinks because they aren't doing anything for me -- and I don't care much about any business unless they are. They can say all sorts of nice things about me, but unless they are selling a product I want, they are generally totally irrelevant to me.

I think 4e is the worst edition of D&D ever published because it is the only edition of D&D ever published that I cannot run the types/styles of games I really enjoy in (without rewriting the rules to the point that they look more like a previous edition than they do 4e). However, I don't begrudge those who enjoy it their enjoyment of it and more than I begrudge those who enjoy golf their enjoyment of a game I find quite boring and pointless. However, I have no problems telling someone who thinks I should play golf (or 4e) that I find the game boring and pointless and why I do.

In essence, he was saying the game is not the rules, it's the activity, it's what is taking place.

I think attempts like these are ultimately futile. They point out the obvious, and they are true, but nothing short of free therapy and possibly rigorous mental counseling gets certain  people over the big lump of feelings they have for that one perfect summer in whatever decade. Because for a lot of guys, the game is the rules. That means if it has ascending AC it's not the right game, or if it has fortitude saves it's not the right game, or if it has this rule or that rule, it's not the right game. And then there's the demand that Wizards not sell products A B and C that they have their staff and marketing working on, but instead sell items x, y, and z that came from 3 decades ago.

For anyone that says "I can't run the game I like in 4e" - I can't imagine the boring non-adventure anti-game clusterfuck of a miserable kinda-like D&D experience that you prefer. I admit that I simply choose to assume that your'e just uncomfortable with the new or just attached to the old, and there's nothing wrong with either of those. In either case, it doesn't mean anything other than a non-opinion.

The article is nice however it misses the fundamental point is that people want to play D&D. I.e. the rules of their favorite edition.  The problem is that Wizards tries to foist the rules of Chess on people wanting to play Checkers.  The issues are compounded by the fact the new game winds up being fun to play and develops a fan base of it's own.

I don't see any way resolve this easily.  Now there effectively three major group of D&D fans. Pre 3e fanbase which is small but now growing slowly again , 3e fanbase which has been taken over by Pathfinder and the 4e group currently supported by Wizards.

Quote from: estar;441315The article is nice however it misses the fundamental point is that people want to play D&D. I.e. the rules of their favorite edition.  The problem is that Wizards tries to foist the rules of Chess on people wanting to play Checkers.  The issues are compounded by the fact the new game winds up being fun to play and develops a fan base of it's own.

I don't see any way resolve this easily.  Now there effectively three major group of D&D fans. Pre 3e fanbase which is small but now growing slowly again , 3e fanbase which has been taken over by Pathfinder and the 4e group currently supported by Wizards.

Well, I agree with that, but I don't think that these three groups suddenly have to start playing the same edition. I think they have to realize that they are part of the same thing, though.. and then just sort of move on in a constructive way.

At what point do people finally shake hands and move on? Should there be fistfights first? It's getting ridiculous.

Quote from: Abyssal Maw;441316Well, I agree with that, but I don't think that these three groups suddenly have to start playing the same edition. I think they have to realize that they are part of the same thing, though.. and then just sort of move on in a constructive way.

At what point do people finally shake hands and move on? Should there be fistfights first? It's getting ridiculous.

do you think comments like:

QuoteFor anyone that says "I can't run the game I like in 4e" - I can't imagine the boring non-adventure anti-game clusterfuck of a miserable kinda-like D&D experience that you prefer.

help to produce some sort of "kumbaya" moment? are they constructive?

He's just trying to prep the crowd for whatever is coming next.

Interesting set of comments from a poster on Enworld:

Quoteit isn't so much that I think Mike likes 1e (I guess) more than 4e as he seems less than comfortable with pre-Essentials 4e. I get the distinct impression that in essence WotC sees 'classic' 4e as a bit of a brick tied around their necks at this point and would sort of like to pretend it never happened. I can kind of sympathize in a way, it would be a lot easier to just go forward and work things out from the spot Essentials is at now without reference to what came before. But they have a lot of SKUs in stock and a lot of fans of the original game holding them back. Not that I share that sentiment myself, but there it is.

Reply: "But pre essential 4e is good."

QuoteRight, we agree, pre-Essentials 'classic' 4e is great. I don't have an issue with Essentials either. In fact I don't really have any big issues with the mix of materials WotC is coming out with now vis-a-vis the two. I just get the impression that it would be mighty convenient for WotC if they could forget pre-Essentials 4e exists. In a way it would be nice as it would kick the clutter WAY down, they could pull out of the old stuff what really worked well and leave behind a bunch of stuff that was just kind of marginal noise (loads of feats, a lot of rather useless powers, certain builds that simply never really worked well, etc). The rest could be Essentialized to one degree or another.

Quote from: kregmosier;441317do you think comments like:



help to produce some sort of "kumbaya" moment? are they constructive?

It might have been too subtle, but I'm assuming such a game doesn't exist. That's the danger of everyone getting their "gotcha" snark in there, I guess.

Quote from: Spinachcat;441260WotC is wasting time and energy trying to appeal to geezers.

Fuck'em.  That's energy better spent on high school and college kids who have disposable incomes and interest in new experiences.

Fuck you asshole. I have spent more money in the past ten years of gaming than the last twenty-five. Cunt.

Quote from: Windjammer;441295/snip
But, and this is the most damning thing, Mearls has said this all before(see also this post). Given how little substance there was behind these remarks in January 2008, I'm skeptical how true they are now.

Does it matter now that he is in a greater position of power?

Not that I am white-knighting or anything, but it seems like Mearls and WOTC to some extent with Essentials is trying to throw some type of bone.

I wouldn't be surprised to find that Mearls and his cadre didn't care much for Heinsoo and his.

Quote from: Windjammer;441320Interesting set of comments from a poster on Enworld:


Reply: "But pre essential 4e is good."

Those quotes must have been written by someone who has no idea.

I simply don't believe the premise that Mearls is "uncomfortable" with pre-essentials 4th edition. Essentials is beginner stuff, and it's very limited. It was designed that way on purpose. It has a beginning and an end.

If you are talking about the change in design standards after Essentials is out, that's a slightly different standard, but none of those are "essentials", theyre just a different designer direction.

As for the rest: I see a recurrent notion at EnWorld that "5e is going to come out and then we will be the favored ones again!" and I laugh every time I see it.

Quote from: jeff37923;441293Except this column would suggest that WotC is desperate to bring those geezers you disparage back into the fold.

Geezer here. I'm gone. I was disenfranchised by WotC by their release of 4E and the marketing debacle that ensued. I will not discount the possibility that WotC might at some future date create something that interests me. But the probability of that is about as likely as pigs sprouting wings and flying to Capistrano. I've migrated to Pathfinder.

Quote from: Abyssal Maw;441316Well, I agree with that, but I don't think that these three groups suddenly have to start playing the same edition. I think they have to realize that they are part of the same thing, though.. and then just sort of move on in a constructive way.

At what point do people finally shake hands and move on? Should there be fistfights first? It's getting ridiculous.

I don't think they can be considered as part of the "same thing". Sure they are part of the same sub-genre of fantasy roleplaying. But the if the point is to play that genre with a particular set of rules how there can be compromise? You playing with that particular set of rules or you are not.

But taking a step back and looking at the current situation who is the one effected by this? Really only one entity, Wizards of the Coast. Wizards is the one most effected by the fracture in the D&D fanbase. The tabletop Roleplaying market is small and with their decision to design and release the 4e rules they fractured it beyond repair. Perhaps beyond the ability to repair it sufficiently to allow a mass market RPG to have a sufficient return on investment to interest a company the size of Hasbro.

Fans of pre-3e editions now have an independent path to develop their favorite edition. Fans of the 3e era of D&D now have an independent path to develop their favorite edition. How could Wizards or any company that owns the D&D brand re-unite those fanbases without losing the current 4e fanbase?

There is no good way out of the current situation. I am sure the corporate heads at Hasbro curse Ryan Dancey and the old Wizard management for the damn Open Gaming License. Sure game doesn't quit working when an older edition is discontinued. But is far far easier to maintain the game's social network of players when you are able to legally produce, support and sell material for that edition. And the OGL permits this for 3e and within limits for older editions as well.

They may curse the OGL but they forget they got something out of it as well. How many more 3e books they sold because literally 80% of the hobby jumped on the d20 bandwagon.  It turned excitement over a revived D&D to a firestorm as everybody who ever had an idea for something D&D was now able to freely contribute.

They forgot that once opening the open source genie they can't bottle it back up. With the release of 4e they did exactly the right steps to throw away being the market leader a open source market place.  Now Paizo is dogging them every step of the way.

Wizards shutting down of all PDF sales instead of just 4e PDFs effectively created the marketplace for the retro-clones. It is a small marketplace to be sure but the tabletop RPGs market is small to begin with every sales counts so to speak.

So where does the owner of the D&D brand go forward from here?