TheRPGSite

The following post is by Spinachcat, who as rpg.netters know is a very level-headed, open-minded, non-hatin', clued-in kind of poster.

He clarifies in the thread that the info quoted here is from conversations with former Hasbro/WOTC employees.

It seems to me, among many other possible comments, that all of a sudden Dancey's BS blogs make a lot of sense. He's trying to ingratiate himself. He got wind of the new prerogatives and wants his job back.

Quote4e is being driven by Hasbro, not WotC.

Hasbro has been watching WoW and drooling. They don't understand why their geek subsidiary can't make the same money. So word has come down from on high. Make more money! Do what that WoW game is doing and do it now!

That's why the plan is a new PHB, new MM and new DMG each year. Hasbro looked at the books and its those titles that sell the most. So we will be getting new "core" books each year.

D&D Insider is all about WoW emulation and the new rules are going to be geared toward making those many millions of WoW players feel welcome.

So the D&D you knew is dead. Go pick the edition you like and play it to your heart's content. As Old Geezer has pointed out, the PDFs for OD&D are on sale right now. Anyone enjoying B/X D&D can grab a copy off eBay or download one of the emulators like Labyrinth Lord or Basic Fantasy or OSRIC if they like AD&D. Ebay has all the D&D you will ever need.

Hopefully, the WotC team will be able to take the directives of Hasbro and still make a great game. 4e may be terrific, but its going to be much more anime / video game fantasy than anything inspired by books. Why? Because in 1974 gamers were readers. In 2008, gamers are console players and MMO players. In 1974, D&D was created by a couple of dudes having a good time. In 2008, it is a corporate mandate developed to please investors.

If I want to play D&D, I got my version and my copy so I'm coolio. I don't need Mike Mearls or Bruce Cordell to tell me what my D&D should be. Me, Gygax, Arneson and crazy Dave Hargrave have D&D covered. However, I am excited to see 4e come out and I hope its an amazingly fun modern fantasy game that brings the new generation into the hobby.

http://forum.rpg.net/showpost.php?p=7795579&postcount=35

The problem, of course, is that what Hasbro's shareholders and officers want out of D&D simply cannot be had without transforming D&D from a tabletop RPG into either some form of MMORPG or a PC/console RPG series.  The differences in the media at hand are too great, and the understanding of both tabletop and digital RPG business are too little on the part of the immediately aforemention parties; Mearls & company are getting screwed, and the tabletop RPG world with them.

Quote from: Pierce InverarityHe clarifies in the thread that the info quoted here is from conversations with former Hasbro/WOTC employees.

Without naming any names, of course.

I could start a thread citing equally nebulous sources, stating that Hasbro are in fact deliberately attempting to sabotage the D&D brand by changing it beyond recognition.

Until I see actual proof of his assertions then I'll just consign it to the hysteria junk pile, thanks.

The scenario outlined, while unsubstantiated, does not strike me as implausible.

I'm not buying it. This is the same hysteria from RPGnet that heralded 3.0.

And really, this is only the mildest form so far.

I chalk this up to people not understanding what all the online crap is actually going to be used for. They see a computer and they think "oh, it's meant to be just like World of Warcraft.."

The video game influence is going to be like "how spells work", not how you play or what you play. So like in World of Warcraft you can equip a wand and just continuously blast enemies like any other weapon. It's going to be something like that. (Note: I have no idea how wands will work in 4.0, I'm just trying to use a hypothetical).

I highly recommend someone take a look at Fantasygrounds II or Kloogeworks or Screenmonkey or OpenRPG to see a third party version of what this stuff actually does. It already exists. The online stuff is meant to do that, but coordinated with something like a facebook site (that's Gleemax) as a matching service. Currently on FantasyGrounds, you use something called the FG Calendar to set up your game. It looks to me, like a bunch of that with more features, and the expectation that there will be a much larger user base.

DNDInsider is going to be a user community website much like the ones that currently exist (RPGnet, here, Enworld, other places...), but with content and management from Wizards of the Coast.

I don't see anything in the quoted post that isn't pretty obvious.
They can't mess with the tabletop world, because we all just do what we do at our tables. Or at our third-party virtual tables, or whatever.

But it's not reasonable to expect Hasbro not to go for the most available money they can squeeze from the property. You get that, right? They aren't interested in tradition or customers' opinions of what it should be. They are a money-making machine. That's what they do. That's all they do. If WoW is where the money is, that's where they'll go. If it's something else in two years, there'll be a 5th edition that goes there. If you think of D&D as a little cult phenomenon, run by the global family of gamers, then it already died when Hasbro took it over. Of course, even the crustiest of old grognards (like me) can see that's probably not the most productive way to look at it.

Quote from: stu2000But it's not reasonable to expect Hasbro not to go for the most available money they can squeeze from the property. You get that, right? They aren't interested in tradition or customers' opinions of what it should be. They are a money-making machine. That's what they do. That's all they do. If WoW is where the money is, that's where they'll go. If it's something else in two years, there'll be a 5th edition that goes there. If you think of D&D as a little cult phenomenon, run by the global family of gamers, then it already died when Hasbro took it over. Of course, even the crustiest of old grognards (like me) can see that's probably not the most productive way to look at it.

Ahh, but theres a catch. If you're good at producing a fantasy tabletop game, its a big ask to become good at producing an computer game. If this really is about sucking WoW'ers into SATT RPGs then its fair to ask whether that strategy is sound. Yes, its a fairly big market, but why would you suddenly become interested in something that is less like what you want to do than what you've already got?

Or, in other words, the question is whether or not D&D could compete as a 'computer game emulator' against computer games. That is, if thats really the way they're taking it.

Urban legend or not, it is certain businesspeople had looked at WoW's figures and asked "how could we replicate that"? Unfortunately, it isn't being done by being followers. By emulating MMORPG features, D&D stands little to gain but it may well lose or damage its own identity. What separates D&D from WoW is not story; single player CRPGs have pro storylines which are better executed than a DM could manage. Ryan Dancey is incorrect. What pen and paper gaming can bring to the table is theoretically limitless emergence (player freedom/sandboxing), player-driven adventures, DM subjectivity (yes, folks, this individuality is not a bug, but an advantage), the do it yourself factor and socialising/face-to-face interaction (the last one may be had in certain MMORPG arrangements, but not consistently). Capitalise on this heavily and you win (although you still won't have WoW's figures). Lose this from before your eyes, and be prepared to be mowed down.

Frankly: I would not be surprised if D&D eventually moved from the hands of a card game company to... yes, Blizzard Entertainment. And why? For reasons similar to TSR's: not seeing your strengths and fighting too hard against supposed weaknesses.

(And if you emulate a CRPG, designer people... emulate Crusaders of the Dark Savant. ;))

The catch is that they might sell fewer 4th eds than they did 3.5 eds and that's going to seem like a dreadful failure to them. I don't think it's a foregone comclusion they'll sell a 4th to everyone that played 3.5. Nor is it a forgione conclusion that 4th will be much more appealing to people that don't enjoy D&D already. No matter how easy they make it, pprpgs are inherently more difficult to arrange and play than WoW.

Quote from: Abyssal MawI chalk this up to people not understanding what all the online crap is actually going to be used for. They see a computer and they think "oh, it's meant to be just like World of Warcraft..

Exactly. A few years ago and it would be people claiming D&D was emulating Everquest. A few years before that and it would be Magic: The Gathering (In fact I can easily imagine the arguments-- "OMG Feats are just like CCG's!")

Interactive gaming entertainment media is a huge, dynamic latticework of intersections, influences and overlaps. Of course there are going to be some areas where the similarities are more pronounced, but that no more proves the emulation hypothesis than saying the increased use of miniatures is an attempt to replicate Warhammer Fantasy Battle.

Anime, WoW etc. are just the buzzwords of the day. By the time 5th edition comes along there will be whole new set of gaming-related monoliths D&D will be accused of emulating. And I suspect it'll be the usual suspects making the same old complaints again.

Quote from: MelanUrban legend or not, it is certain businesspeople had looked at WoW's figures and asked "how could we replicate that"? Unfortunately, it isn't being done by being followers. By emulating MMORPG features, D&D stands little to gain but it may well lose or damage its own identity. What separates D&D from WoW is not story; single player CRPGs have pro storylines which are better executed than a DM could manage. Ryan Dancey is incorrect. What pen and paper gaming can bring to the table is theoretically limitless emergence (player freedom/sandboxing), player-driven adventures, DM subjectivity (yes, folks, this individuality is not a bug, but an advantage), the do it yourself factor and socialising/face-to-face interaction (the last one may be had in certain MMORPG arrangements, but not consistently). Capitalise on this heavily and you win (although you still won't have WoW's figures). Lose this from before your eyes, and be prepared to be mowed down.

Excellent point, and one that I think the folks at Hasbro/Wizards are more than aware of.

They've tried the direct MMO route anyway with Stormreach. What we're seing with 4E is not an attempt at emulation.

OH MY!  New Core Books every single year?!?

I'd love to see a source on that, since it sounds completely implausible to me.

-O

Quote from: obrynOH MY!  New Core Books every single year?!?

I'd love to see a source on that, since it sounds completely implausible to me.

-O

I dunno DMG2...DMG....3....PHB2, PHB3, and how many Monster Manuals for 3.5 are there, something like 5?
Isn't that more than one a year?
Seems pretty plausible to me.

Quote from: obrynOH MY!  New Core Books every single year?!?

I'd love to see a source on that, since it sounds completely implausible to me.

I can't provide the link, but I did see this a while back.

PHB2, DMG2 and MM2 will be released in 2009. PHB3, DMG3 and MM3 will be released in 2010, etc. Apparently the third edition expansions were so popular that they've adopted it as the standard model for introducing new core classes, races and monsters.

The aim is to keep all non setting specific rules expansions in one line of books, IIRC.

Quote from: obrynOH MY! New Core Books every single year?!?
 
I'd love to see a source on that, since it sounds completely implausible to me.
 
-O

Ditto. Pretty much everyone at WOTC realizes that just wouldn't fly. Hasbro may or may not be pushing WOTC in certain directions but they've showed signs of realizing that D&D is not Monopoly and aren't likely to do something when everyone below says not to.
 
And PHB2 etc. are not really core books; they optional, like putting out a new Unearthed Arcana every year.

1) I'm ok with buying new monsters every year. More monsters reliably equals more fun!

2) PHB II was worth the $26 it was selling for on Amazon. (I got mine free as a gift from one of the guys in my campaign.)  It saw plenty of use. It still sees plenty of use...

3) It should be pointed out: DMG II was not actually a big seller. I have one. It sees very little use*. I don't think they'll do another book like this, just like I don't think they'll do another Deities and Demigods. Even hardcore fans like me probably won't pick it up.

4) We could look at the complete series as a set of player books. They're totally optional, but there's some very cool stuff in them. I am looking at rejoining my old Friday group (I'm already playing on Thursday nights) and thinking about playing a Green Star Adept (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20041105a). Would I somehow be deprived if I never owned Complete Arcane? Well nah, I had like 9 other character ideas. I just thought this made for a cool concept. I love having options.

* I use the DMG II for the stat block revision which I have adopted for my own campaigns. When I was coming up with my dungeon templates last year I used it quite a lot, but not so much anymore. In other words: I used it a lot when I was planning a campaign and writing adventures, but when I was running my campaign week to week, it rarely got used.

So I'm somewhere in the middle of the new core books conspiracy theory. I'm ok with monster books and books that expand player options.

Quote from: DrewExcellent point, and one that I think the folks at Hasbro/Wizards are more than aware of.

They've tried the direct MMO route anyway with Stormreach. What we're seing with 4E is not an attempt at emulation.

I don't agree with arguments which state that D&D 4e is an "MMORPG" (or, for that matter, "anime"), but certain developments, like the per encounter philosophy, point in that direction. RPGs normally don't have that problem, because their time is entirely subjective... you can fast forward without losing play time to camping and stuff. In MMORPGs, it is a neccessity. But why are designers seeking to replicate the pacing MMORPGs have?

It is one step, and not a full transformation... but it is there.

social networking + online gameplay features != MMORPG, at all.

Quote from: MelanI don't agree with arguments which state that D&D 4e is an "MMORPG" (or, for that matter, "anime"), but certain developments, like the per encounter philosophy, point in that direction. RPGs normally don't have that problem, because their time is entirely subjective... you can fast forward without losing play time to camping and stuff. In MMORPGs, it is a neccessity. But why are designers seeking to replicate the pacing MMORPGs have?

It is one step, and not a full transformation... but it is there.

I think that RPG's, MMO's, CCG's, Wargames, Console games and CRPG's are influencing one another all the time, in ways both subtle and overt. My point is that this in no way supports the emulation hypothesis, rather it's a natural byproduct of the entertainment industry feeding on itself. The people who work in gaming (whatever the format) seem to recognise your earlier point that whilst you can borrow certain concepts and effects you still have to play to your medium's strengths in order to achieve longterm success.

That's why I don't think D&D is becoming like an MMO, because it can't. Not without scrapping the tabletop element altogether, at least.

Quote from: DevPsocial networking + online gameplay features != MMORPG, at all.

i think it's more like "MORPG"--groups aren't really all that "Massive"

Quote from: Melansingle player CRPGs have pro storylines which are better executed than a DM could manage.

If you like being railroaded.

Quote from: walkerpIf you like being railroaded.

Precisely. It surprised me that a lot of people do. :/

RE: PHB II, PHB III, DMG II, DMG III, etc.

I just want to toss out the idea that we not call these upcoming products corebooks.  This new model may warrant a new stupid terminology, the way someone on RPGnet came up with the term fatsplat to describe the faction books for Exalted.  Off the top of my head I'm going to suggest the term core supplement to differentiate these books from both the standard run-of-the-mill supplements and the three books you actually need to play.

Quote from: jrientsRE: PHB II, PHB III, DMG II, DMG III, etc.

I just want to toss out the idea that we not call these upcoming products corebooks.  This new model may warrant a new stupid terminology, the way someone on RPGnet came up with the term fatsplat to describe the faction books for Exalted.  Off the top of my head I'm going to suggest the term core supplement to differentiate these books from both the standard run-of-the-mill supplements and the three books you actually need to play.

This niggled me somewhat, too. It implies that the subsequent books will be as necessary as the first three.

Core Supplement has a nice ring to it. Hopefully Wizards will adopt something similar, if only to prevent the inevitable hue and cry of people claiming they're being forced into buying them.

Quote from: MelanI don't agree with arguments which state that D&D 4e is an "MMORPG" (or, for that matter, "anime"), but certain developments, like the per encounter philosophy, point in that direction. RPGs normally don't have that problem, because their time is entirely subjective... you can fast forward without losing play time to camping and stuff. In MMORPGs, it is a neccessity. But why are designers seeking to replicate the pacing MMORPGs have?

It is one step, and not a full transformation... but it is there.

Yes, and to emphasize this line a bit: the logic of "per encounter" forces a certain kind of play. That is, with "per day" powers, you have the option of spacing each encounter out to a different day and fast-forwarding between them. You also have the option of there being a variable number of encounters, partly determined by the players' decisions, which means it becomes a strategic decision whether to use a given power or to save it for later. "Per encounter" removes the second option.

Quote from: Elliot WilenYes, and to emphasize this line a bit: the logic of "per encounter" forces a certain kind of play. That is, with "per day" powers, you have the option of spacing each encounter out to a different day and fast-forwarding between them. You also have the option of there being a variable number of encounters, partly determined by the players' decisions, which means it becomes a strategic decision whether to use a given power or to save it for later. "Per encounter" removes the second option.

There will still be "per day" powers in 4E, so the effect is likely to be mitigated somewhat. My (purely baseless) speculation is that a lot of the high end, super damaging effects will occupy this slot.

Quote from: MelanFrankly: I would not be surprised if D&D eventually moved from the hands of a card game company to... yes, Blizzard Entertainment. And why? For reasons similar to TSR's: not seeing your strengths and fighting too hard against supposed weaknesses.

I think that's the heart of the matter: lack of confidence that your game is actually valuable in and of itself, which fear is then converted into evolve-or-die hysteria. I can see that attitude originate at Hasbro, trickle down to the WOTC CEO and his adjuncts, and then served up to Mearls & Co. as a memo.

Eh. Last I heard, D&D is barely a blip on Hasbro's financial radar. I've looked through some of their reports and D&D is almost literally a footnote.

It doesn't seem as if the D&D online game has become a hit. I can't imagine Hasbro wanting to follow that up with more, especially when they could create a whole new property.

Seanchai

Quote from: walkerpIf you like being railroaded.

In most CRPGs you know when you have choice and when you're watching exposition setting up the next section of the game.  Not so with tabletop games, and the reason so many players despise the "railroad" I think.

Neverwinter Nights - or more accurately, the ability to make your own modules or even persistent worlds with it - would be a good start for developing an online DM aid to make D&D far more "electronic". I made many modules with the toolkit and had a blast doing it, and my players enjoyed them as well. We WERE playing D&D online, probably almost exactly as Wizard's would like.

So why not just take the existing NWN and NWN2 and tune it up a bit and make IT what they want? I know its not EXACTLY what they're shooting fore (more like a half-way between NWN and true tabletop), but I think it'd work out quite well.

Unfortunately, NWN2 completely abandoned any attempts at ease of use.  While they'd promised up and down before release that they would make the toolset easier to use and include copious tutorials and help files, instead they dropped a massively complex toolset on the general public with no documentation, and an interface that is far less intuitive than NWN1's was.  

The one to look at now, I think, is the Ryzom Ring setup, which is far easier to use, and would make a pretty decent model really, the game engine's even open source.  Unfortunately, Ryzom's a pretty obscure game, with a very wierd setting.  It's cool as hell, but it's one of those games that's probably doomed by it's own wierdness.

Quote from: J ArcaneUnfortunately, NWN2 completely abandoned any attempts at ease of use.  While they'd promised up and down before release that they would make the toolset easier to use and include copious tutorials and help files, instead they dropped a massively complex toolset on the general public with no documentation, and an interface that is far less intuitive than NWN1's was.  

The one to look at now, I think, is the Ryzom Ring setup, which is far easier to use, and would make a pretty decent model really, the game engine's even open source.  Unfortunately, Ryzom's a pretty obscure game, with a very wierd setting.  It's cool as hell, but it's one of those games that's probably doomed by it's own wierdness.

It's open source?  I wonder how tightly linked the resolution is - so perhaps you could drop in a different rules set or something...hmmm....

Quote from: James J SkachIt's open source?  I wonder how tightly linked the resolution is - so perhaps you could drop in a different rules set or something...hmmm....

Well, the engine is open source, the game itself is a commercial product, and I don't know how much of the Ring's functionality is included in the source.

I'd recommend checking it out though.  There's a free trial mode that's not time-limited, and it does include a cut down version of the Ring.  

The setting is kind of a wierd sci-fantasy thing, with a really cool and alien art style to it.  It could probably make a good topic for a revival of Pundit's "WTF is this shit?" thread series.  ;)

Am I missing something here? If D&D becomes predominantly a computer game, isn't that the end of new D&D being a tabletop RPG?

Quote from: CabAm I missing something here? If D&D becomes predominantly a computer game, isn't that the end of new D&D being a tabletop RPG?

Well, other than that the nonsensical idea that 4th edition "will be" a "computer game", that there are already several D&D computer games already, and that people are completely misunderstanding the role that the computer tools will be taking with the new game, I guess... no?

Just to assuage Abyssal Maw's concerns (if he has any about my posts), I do not think 4th Edition is a computer game.  I think they are introducing tools to facilitate play - particularly long distance gatherings - and that's about it.  It's no more a computer game than this forum is a computer game becasue you can play-by-post.

Also, it should be clear that all of my speculation and prediction on 5th Edition, silly as it might seem, has been based on the idea that it will be a computer game, but not in the way we think of computer games now - not even WoW paradigm. It will be, IMHO, the next step.

I'm talking about using the computer to really, truly facilitate play - whether that be around the table or around the world.  Essentially, everyone would have a PHB/tablet that would be the same $30 but would be specialized computer (like a Tivo is simply a computer with one task, or an iPod is) whose one and only task would be to play D&D. The DMG will be a software you run on a server, with a print version for "legacy play." If you go to an individual's house to play, you simply connect into the local network running the local copy and that DM's adventure/campaign/world (or one he's downloaded - a module as it were).  If you play via Internet, you use the same exact device, perhaps with a different interface, perhaps not, and you connect either to a public or private server running games - where you meet up with your group and your DM takes you through the game. WotC will sell subscriptions for players and DM's and sell individual group access to worlds and modules - but will also use the system to facilitate Living Campaign play that acts more like WoW (lot's of groups running around in the same world with instances for individual groups where appropriate).

That's what I'm talking about - and I think 5th Edition will offer books just like always, but this will be the direction into which they put their energy...

Quote from: Abyssal MawWell, other than that the nonsensical idea that 4th edition "will be" a "computer game", that there are already several D&D computer games already, and that people are completely misunderstanding the role that the computer tools will be taking with the new game, I guess... no?

Keep up. Read the spate of posts predicting thats where 5th edition would head.

Quote from: CabKeep up. Read the spate of posts predicting thats where 5th edition would head.

Dude, I don't need to keep up because it's all obsessive groundless hysteria. Predict all the fuck you want. Feel free.

Anyhow, nearly exactly the same thing happened when 3rd edition was announced.

Flying Cars, I tells ya...FLYING CARS!!!  :what:

Don´t be stupid folks.
There´s DDO, correct?

It´s built upon 3.5, correct?

Will there be an update for DDO to 4th?
Maybe a relaunch?

I cannot see any reason why there shouldn´t be an DDO overhaul in the works.

Quote from: Abyssal MawDude, I don't need to keep up because it's all obsessive groundless hysteria. Predict all the fuck you want. Feel free.

Anyhow, nearly exactly the same thing happened when 3rd edition was announced.

Ahh, I see, so you're too proud to admit you took the comment you replied to out of context. Fine.

Quote from: Bradford C. WalkerThe problem, of course, is that what Hasbro's shareholders and officers want out of D&D simply cannot be had without transforming D&D from a tabletop RPG into either some form of MMORPG or a PC/console RPG series.  The differences in the media at hand are too great, and the understanding of both tabletop and digital RPG business are too little on the part of the immediately aforemention parties; Mearls & company are getting screwed, and the tabletop RPG world with them.

You and I may wind up on the same page yet.  Truthfully I'll hate to be proven right.  I mean I like to be right, but being right because the main player in the industry is jumping off a bridge to find out if the rocks at the bottom of the gorge are sharp?  Not so much.

I'd much rather see a healthy and well managed D&D lose out to beter game designs in the long run.  Than the entire industry be dragged down and burned with fire.