Knights & Knaves Alehouse

Falconer wrote:Look, I’ve never bought the argument that I should be content with the fact that I already have D&D in the form I enjoy playing. Shared experience is important in this hobby. I would love for more people to share the D&D that I love, rather than having to wall myself off into an ever-smaller community because I REALLY can’t relate to 3e and 4e fans.

I don't disagree with this, but I think we're fooling ourselves if we believe WotC is going to deliver a game that will enable this kind of shared experience. Plus, we have the tools necessary to increase the size and vibrancy of our community already -- games like OSRIC and Labyrinth Lord and Swords & Wizardry. I'm not sure we need "Dungeons & Dragons" anymore.

If, by some miracle, I can use 5e books to run a 1e-esque game, then why shouldn't I? I could greatly increase my player pool. With 7 regular players, it's not really a problem atm, but if I ever have a hankering to run the 12+ player games I did bitd, then *displaying* 5e books at my table in the game store would hasten recruitment.

James Maliszewski wrote:

Falconer wrote:Look, I’ve never bought the argument that I should be content with the fact that I already have D&D in the form I enjoy playing. Shared experience is important in this hobby. I would love for more people to share the D&D that I love, rather than having to wall myself off into an ever-smaller community because I REALLY can’t relate to 3e and 4e fans.

I don't disagree with this, but I think we're fooling ourselves if we believe WotC is going to deliver a game that will enable this kind of shared experience. Plus, we have the tools necessary to increase the size and vibrancy of our community already -- games like OSRIC and Labyrinth Lord and Swords & Wizardry. I'm not sure we need "Dungeons & Dragons" anymore.

We don't need them at all. And I don't think Mike & Monte are going to put their eggs in the Old School basket, either. What we're going to get, is the RPG equivalent of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0A7tLVIs ... re=related

James Maliszewski wrote:

Falconer wrote:Look, I’ve never bought the argument that I should be content with the fact that I already have D&D in the form I enjoy playing. Shared experience is important in this hobby. I would love for more people to share the D&D that I love, rather than having to wall myself off into an ever-smaller community because I REALLY can’t relate to 3e and 4e fans.

I don't disagree with this, but I think we're fooling ourselves if we believe WotC is going to deliver a game that will enable this kind of shared experience. Plus, we have the tools necessary to increase the size and vibrancy of our community already -- games like OSRIC and Labyrinth Lord and Swords & Wizardry. I'm not sure we need "Dungeons & Dragons" anymore.

If our objective is to re-establish early 1E style role playing on a wide scale (with in store presence) we probably do. Of course, its very unrealistic to think WOTC will suddenly become Gygaxian (or produce a product that appeals to those of us with that sort of taste). But you never know....bell bottoms and polyester made a long comeback (never thought I'd see that).

AxeMental wrote:
If our objective is to re-establish early 1E style role playing on a wide scale (with in store presence) we probably do. Of course, its very unrealistic to think WOTC will suddenly become Gygaxian (or produce a product that appeals to those of us with that sort of taste). But you never know....bell bottoms and polyester made a long comeback (never thought I'd see that).

Let me get a lance for you, Don.

AxeMental wrote:If our objective is to re-establish early 1E style role playing on a wide scale (with in store presence) we probably do. Of course, its very unrealistic to think WOTC will suddenly become Gygaxian (or produce a product that appeals to those of us with that sort of taste).

But does anyone here even think that's a realistic goal? Even if we assume that WotC is utterly sincere (which I don't), what are the odds that something like Gygaxian AD&D in pen and paper form is going to fly as a mass market product in 2012? I just don't see it.

1e as "1e" cannot be re-established as a popular choice, what could be re-established is the concept of player gaming skill over player character-creating skill or character skill. That won't replace 1e, but could create the middle ground between editions.

People need to remember that 3e was a success almost equal to 1e, and unlike Trent, I don't think the bloom suddenly blew off the rose in 2001--it look a lot longer and I think it was selling well for the first half of the decade. The game needs to appeal to the moderates--those who were willing to make the change from 1e to 2e without any problem, as well as those who felt the game needed to be updated yet stay familiar.

It's the moderates who they are appealing to. I'm assuming by this that 4e wasn't as popular and was a big factor in moving people towards Pathfinder and OSR. Quite frankly, I think the majority want a game that's familiar and the big thing 4e did is make so many changes it is barely recognizable. 3e did appeal because if you handn't played for 20 years and were a casual gamer, while the rules were different--you still had your classes, your classic races, and your spells. And some people liked the innovations--I was a big fan of how they revamped saving throws, for instance, and getting rid of the weird add-ons to ability scores after the 3-18 range. I certainly don't believe any form of D&D is perfect. But at the same time, don't break what didn't need to be fixed.

If they can find the best common ground and appeal to those looking at the competition, they'll have done their job. They won't "unite" everybody, but they will likely unite those willing to compromise and that's the most realistic goal.

James Maliszewski wrote:

AxeMental wrote:If our objective is to re-establish early 1E style role playing on a wide scale (with in store presence) we probably do. Of course, its very unrealistic to think WOTC will suddenly become Gygaxian (or produce a product that appeals to those of us with that sort of taste).

But does anyone here even think that's a realistic goal? Even if we assume that WotC is utterly sincere (which I don't), what are the odds that something like Gygaxian AD&D in pen and paper form is going to fly as a mass market product in 2012? I just don't see it.

On the flip-side, maybe the RPG and especially the 4e markets have shrunk, because Gygaxian D&D really is better. I wouldn't expect 1980's levels of sales, either, but I know people who are sick and tired of WoW. And children who actually do things other than just play video games. I think a lot of the conventional wisdom in this area is a bit warped and outside the echo-chambers of the internet, things are a little different.

The later editions don't have the same magic. And success was AD&D's proof. The growth of the OSR has proved a few things, I think. It's easy to dismiss the younger generation, but I have younger players who show up and show back up, for my Meet-up Group Open Table game. Right now, two games are run at the same location, twice a month. AD&D and Chaosium's BRP. 20 or so regular attendees.

Fads come and go, but the classics always survive. Why sell the younger generation short? Why not leave the doom n' gloom to the likes of Ryan Dancey, and consider that maybe more people than we might think, are capable of appreciating our games?

They're damn good games, and we're not so all fired special, that we're the only ones capable of seeing that fact.

If I'm mistaken about this and WotC comes through and 5e is the Second Coming of mass market success, I'll happily eat crow. Seriously, I'd love to be proven wrong on this, but I don't expect to be.

I feel sorry for those who don't have the same opportunities I had as a youngster of going to the toy store and buying RPG books by Gary Gygax brand new off the shelves. It takes a bit of hunting to find the OSR. Many of those poor youngsters probably think they're stuck with 4e and with video games.

JRT wrote:3e… I was a big fan of… getting rid of the weird add-ons to ability scores after the 3-18 range

That’s the single thing that turned me off the most about 3e, if I can be 100% honest right now.

I also don't see where anyone can say that 1st ed AD&D and 3e can compare in the number of sales.

geezerdm wrote:Mike Mearls quote via EN World:

"We plan to continue offering people access to tools like the D&D Character Builder and the D&D Monster Builder to support 4th edition. We're also exploring ideas for conversion tools so that some of the 4th edition characters and content will be playable with the next edition." - Mike Mearls.

Judging from that some,, I don't think a whole lot of 4e is going to make it into 5.

I'm actually expecting something that looks a lot like C&C. With a few interchangeable parts, options, etc.

And if you are correct, then WotC are just pulling a reverse of what they did in 2008... throwing 4e players under the bus in favor of another group of fans; which shoots his kumbaya, big-umbrella edition talk in the foot.

JRT wrote:People need to remember that 3e was a success almost equal to 1e, and unlike Trent, I don't think the bloom suddenly blew off the rose in 2001--it look a lot longer and I think it was selling well for the first half of the decade.

If sales hadn't dropped off a cliff in 2002 we would not have seen the release of 3.5 in 2003. I remember reading somewhere (no idea where, possibly Monte Cook's blog?) that a "3.5" revision was always intended by WotC, but ended up being released about 2 years ahead of schedule. That wouldn't have happened if sales had been holding up. And while the 3.5 release did temporarily boost sales for WotC (the way the initial release of a new edition always does -- there was big talk about the initial success of 2E and 4E too) it 1) is pretty much universally acknowledged as having absolutely murdered the third-party d20 market as literally hundreds of products (and even more products in development) were rendered instantly obsolete, and 2) apparently dropped off pretty quickly and steadily even for WotC, to the point that by about 2005 everyone released the "boom days" were long gone. The release of 3.5 was a bridge-burning desperation play to garner a temporary sales-boost at the expense of the longer-term health of the brand. A company that was still achieving good sales figures wouldn't have done such a thing.