5E Announced

[finarvyn]

Rafe -- in general I agree with you that the company should meet the needs of the consumer and not the other way around, but this case is different becasue they are trying to attract two totally different consumer demographics that really don't overlap.

You've got old school gamers who want minimalistic rules and thin B&W rulebooks. You've got new school gamers who want tons of options and thick glossy rulebooks. (Exaggerated somewhat for effect.) Not a lot of overlap.

My thinking, therefore, is that for 5E to work both sides will have to change their thinking a little. Old timers will have to accept more gloss and flash-bang while new timers will have to accept more tradition and simplicity. If only one side compromises, or worse if neither side compromises, 5E is doomed.

[Havard]

My thinking, therefore, is that for 5E to work both sides will have to change their thinking a little. Old timers will have to accept more gloss and flash-bang while new timers will have to accept more tradition and simplicity. If only one side compromises, or worse if neither side compromises, 5E is doomed.

As I see it, 5E is not for the old school community. When they talk about making an edition that will unite the D&D fans, they are talking mainly about uniting those fans who belong to the current 4E demographic and the d20/3E/PF group. Possibly a few 2nd Ed fans can also be won over, but for the most part TSR era fans can be safely ignored because they will not buy the edition anyway. Their main interest is to post grumpy messages on forums, or at best write or support OSR editions. Ofcourse there are exceptions, but these are such a small group anyway.

Uniting 4E and 3E fans is going to be difficult enough since 4E was designed to be so different from previous editions.

-Havard

[Rafael]

I think both of you are right, but only in a very limited environment.

I think it's wrong to assume that there is a transgression between the D&D editions.

Demand for games is not so much dictated by "open-mindedness", as by need.

If one system works well for one's purposes, why switch?



And, then, why switch to D&D 3e, 4e, 5e?

3e books were interesting because of the OGL.

But 4e books? The already flawed ruleset from 3e was made even worse (think of the famous "Mach 3" elves, as the textbook example),
and the overall quality of the supplemental products, and product support in general wasn't great.



So, either as a newbie and as a seasoned oldschooler, why should I pick 4e, or, for that matter,
any game that is neither different nor better than other, existing products?

The real issue, as I see it, is that, since around mid-3e, after the release of, I think, "Mysteries of the Moon Sea",
Wizbro has simply put out bad products.

I don't know how many of you really check new RPG publications, but, just for example,
one of the biggest strengths of the Paizo books is that they are brilliantly edited.

Or, the new Dark Heresy books: Good editing, good art, very good writing, very condensed and very usable content.

Take against that any book Wizbro has put out recently. Like "Expedition to Castle Ravenloft", where the final chapter was missing from the printed book.

And, the prize!

The usual D&D starter set, which contains of three rulebooks, two setting books, and possibly one adventure module.

That's between 130 $ and 180 $ here that we are talking to have everything we need to play on a most basic level.


Show me one person under 30 years of age that can spare such a sum for a board game that might not even be that great
compared to others.

In comparison, the dreadful "The One Ring" game cost me 50 €, all in all, and I have everything I need to play.

What is a student, or a parent for his kid, more likely to pick, would you say?



Wooohooo, that got longer than I thought.

[Havard]

If one system works well for one's purposes, why switch?

The main reason for a switch is that you get tired of an edition after a while. Back when I was gaming alot, it seemed after a while that I had tried out every option the _rules_ would allow me.

Second reason would be curiousity about a new system and brand new approaches to a new game.

Thirdly, new editions tend to be more popular among new gamers, and it might be easier to find players of those editions.

And, then, why switch to D&D 3e, 4e, 5e?

3e books were interesting because of the OGL.

But 4e books? The already flawed ruleset from 3e was made even worse (think of the famous "Mach 3" elves, as the textbook example),
and the overall quality of the supplemental products, and product support in general wasn't great.

The main advantage 4E has over 3E is that it adressed the criticism of 3E taking ages of prep before running a game. If you are more interested in tactical play, you might also prefer 4E. I dont swing that way, but some do.

The real issue, as I see it, is that, since around mid-3e, after the release of, I think, "Mysteries of the Moon Sea",
Wizbro has simply put out bad products.

I disagree. My favorite book from the 4E era is Planes Above by the esteemed Ari Marmell, whom you ofcourse know

I don't know how many of you really check new RPG publications, but, just for example,
one of the biggest strengths of the Paizo books is that they are brilliantly edited.

Or, the new Dark Heresy books: Good editing, good art, very good writing, very condensed and very usable content.

I have never cared too much about editing, but good layout and art are definately selling points for Pathfinder and the WH40K games.

And, the prize!

The usual D&D starter set, which contains of three rulebooks, two setting books, and possibly one adventure module.

That's between 130 $ and 180 $ here that we are talking to have everything we need to play on a most basic level.


Show me one person under 30 years of age that can spare such a sum for a board game that might not even be that great
compared to others.

You dont need that many books to play. Two setting books and a module? To be fair, you only need the 3 Core books to play.


The main disadvantage WotC has is that they lack the flexibility of smaller companies and the ability to communicate with the market. New editions always tend to be a compromise between good game design and commercial interest. One may hate this, but that is just corporate America for you. At least we have smaller companies competing with them, forcing them to get their act straight. It seems like they are starting to learn their lesson, but we shall see


-Havard

[Rafael]

The main reason for a switch is that you get tired of an edition after a while. Back when I was gaming alot, it seemed after a while that I had tried out every option the _rules_ would allow me.

That's a valid point, of course. I am too lazy for that, though.

Second reason would be curiousity about a new system and brand new approaches to a new game.

Okay, sure, but then again, there are slimmer rulebooks if one just wants to experiment.

I disagree. My favorite book from the 4E era is Planes Above by the esteemed Ari Marmell, whom you ofcourse know

Never read it, though I can say, the books for 4e that I read were unremarkable at best, and bad at worst.

I have never cared too much about editing, but good layout and art are definately selling points for Pathfinder and the WH40K games.

I began to care when Wizbro books started referring to chapters that were not in the book...

You dont need that many books to play. Two setting books and a module? To be fair, you only need the 3 Core books to play.

Of course, you don't NEED that many books, but let's face it, D&D marketing is very much based around that idea.

Wasn't that 4e's great strategy? 3 core books, 3 setting books each?

That, more than anything else, is an awful lot of money if you buy it for full price.

The main disadvantage WotC has is that they lack the flexibility of smaller companies and the ability to communicate with the market. New editions always tend to be a compromise between good game design and commercial interest. One may hate this, but that is just corporate America for you. At least we have smaller companies competing with them, forcing them to get their act straight. It seems like they are starting to learn their lesson, but we shall see

Nah, I don't hate them. I NOTHING them.

Whatever they do, how does it affect my gaming table?

If their new edition is a great success, just as if it is a great failure, I am pretty sure my own game won't be affected.


I shall never weep like when they cancelled MERP again, not even for D&D.

[Havard]

The main reason for a switch is that you get tired of an edition after a while. Back when I was gaming alot, it seemed after a while that I had tried out every option the _rules_ would allow me.

That's a valid point, of course. I am too lazy for that, though.

Yep, but then again you and I are not the main target audience. Ten years ago you might have been more likely to switch.

Second reason would be curiousity about a new system and brand new approaches to a new game.

Okay, sure, but then again, there are slimmer rulebooks if one just wants to experiment.

Sure, but not everyone wants a rules light system. 4E was aimed at those gamers who like fairly complex tactically oriented systems. It seems now that WotC went too far in this direction, but alot of players did make the switch and do love their 4E games.

Never read it, though I can say, the books for 4e that I read were unremarkable at best, and bad at worst.

My main issue with 4E books is not their quality, but the design philosophy that dictates that crunch is good and fluff is bad. This makes most 4E books fairly boring to someone who is not playing that specific edition, whereas I pick up 3E and 2E books to read just for fun.

I began to care when Wizbro books started referring to chapters that were not in the book...

Seems like you are making alot out of complaints against a single product.

Of course, you don't NEED that many books, but let's face it, D&D marketing is very much based around that idea.

Of course, they are in the business to make money. But you can easily play with just a couple of books.

Wasn't that 4e's great strategy? 3 core books, 3 setting books each?

I dont think so. The 3 Core books concept was about the 3E launch. With 4E, I think they always had multiple PHBs and DMGs planned.

They did promise to publish 3 books for each setting and then move onto a new one, but this is really a separate issue and had more to do with WotC wanting to publish multiple settings, but wanted to avoid supporting them beyond the 3 books.

Whatever they do, how does it affect my gaming table?

If their new edition is a great success, just as if it is a great failure, I am pretty sure my own game won't be affected.

This is what I have been trying to convince people on other Old School Forums about. What WotC does affects us all. Thing is, D&D is the product most likely to recruit new people into the hobby. Without new blood, conventions will dry up, game designers will look elsewhere for jobs instead of selling awesome products through minor companies for no profit in hope of one day working for WotC (where you actually get paid!), people stop coming to forums and in the end it is over.

You will still have your gaming table of course, assuming your players stick around. :?

-Havard

[Rafael]

Yep, but then again you and I are not the main target audience. Ten years ago you might have been more likely to switch.

And there's exactly the error.

Who can afford D&D stuff? I would say, sure as hell not students.

D&D has aged with it's audience, I would say.

Younger people play younger, more economic games.

That's why Pathfinder and Warhammer 40,000 are doing so well right now.

Seems like you are making alot out of complaints against a single product.

Yeah, because it was the ONE gaming book I really looked out for.

Can't remember when I have been bummed about something so trivial since my teenage days.

This is what I have been trying to convince people on other Old School Forums about. What WotC does affects us all. Thing is, D&D is the product most likely to recruit new people into the hobby. Without new blood, conventions will dry up, game designers will look elsewhere for jobs instead of selling awesome products through minor companies for no profit in hope of one day working for WotC (where you actually get paid!), people stop coming to forums and in the end it is ove

And there I highly disagree. The hobby is not depending on D&D.
If the D&D brand retires, other games will take its place.

The thing is, though, the hobby is changing from a high-profile, higly expensive game exercise,
to a more basic and economic, "casual" nature.

Online piracy, as well as all the legally free stuff is covering any gamer's basic needs already.

(Just think of the completely free Talislanta library in combination with an ipad.)

Books to be bought have to be exceptionally good. Wizbro has simply overslept the change of the tide.

[Rafael]

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/dungeon ... 0786962464

3e core books are rereleased, as were the 1e before.

That, and Monte Cook has left Wizbro again, can't find the link right now.



...And suddenly, nobody gave a crap about 5e any more.

D&D dying a slow death has just been, uuh, sped up.