Now I'm saying that every day, so bear with me.

Some time ago, TCO posted what amounts to a troll thread (duh) on RPGnet telling people that the greatest danger to the success of D&D Next isn't that it's going to flop horribly one way or another, but that it's going to end up being "meh" for all the different play styles of D&Ders the game tries to catter to.

The more we move on into the playtest, reading the columns of the Wizs and all that, the more that possibility becomes probable, to me. When you consider the 4e fans' attachment to the notion of balance for instance and that they are being thrown bones like surges (hit dice) and the like without actually having the same class structure than the game they like, you might see where their frustrations come from. When you have a guy like me who sees the game becoming increasingly complex with basically builds of characters made to remind you of classic D&D archetypes, apparently without the actual meat behind to recreate the type of gameplay I like (I'd have to houserule save or die, level drain, hit points, recuperation mechanics, etc etc to get where I want to go, stuff like henchmen and hirelings have been scratched to be brought back "later" as an afterthought, etc), I don't really see how this game could even make it as a secondary game for me - too much work involved.

So I'm thinking that the outcome where everyone looks at the game, maybe pillages this or that idea from the core book, and then just goes "meh, I'd never run that as a whole instead of [edition X]" is a real possibility at this point, and this would make 5e a commercial failure akin to 4th on the short term, just after initial sales of core books.

What do you guys think?

D&D should be D&D and not try to be what every other game has implemented.

It never works.

I think the whole D&D brand has been dogged by an aura of negativity for a while now.*

One of the attractions of the OSR is that the overall attitude is one of gung-ho enthusiasm rather than entitled nerdrage. I'm not sure what WotC can do to get the old attitude back.


*Part of it is edition warring, of course, but it's not just that. When Essentials was released I was curious enough to drop by the WotC boards to find out how different it was from vanilla 4e and I was stunned by how much vitriol there was. You'd have thought that the developers had personally come to peoples homes, killed their families and kicked their dogs.

Quote from: Dimitrios;549676I think the whole D&D brand has been dogged by an aura of negativity for a while now.*

One of the attractions of the OSR is that the overall attitude is one of gung-ho enthusiasm rather than entitled nerdrage. I'm not sure what WotC can do to get the old attitude back.


*Part of it is edition warring, of course, but it's not just that. When Essentials was released I was curious enough to drop by the WotC boards to find out how different it was from vanilla 4e and I was stunned by how much vitriol there was. You'd have thought that the developers had personally come to peoples homes, killed their families and kicked their dogs.

During the reign of 4E, mostly during the beginning of that reign, WotC/Hasbro really fed in to that feeling of entitlement. Now they must reap what they have sown and somehow seperate the wheat from chaff in the reaping.

Quote from: jeff37923;549677During the reign of 4E, mostly during the beginning of that reign, WotC/Hasbro really fed in to that feeling of entitlement. Now they must reap what they have sown and somehow seperate the wheat from chaff in the reaping.

Can they? That really sounds like Mission: Impossible to me.

Or perhaps an overwrought metaphor.

Quote from: B.T.;549680Or perhaps an overwrought metaphor.

Could you elaborate? I'm not sure I catch your meaning.

I knew it was going to be "meh".

What I wanted to see (and what I have, happily, seen) is the deprecation if not outright removal of lots of 4e elements, the inclusion of a few elements from older versions of D&D and "4e" "community" being angered by this.  I wanted to see the smug fucks who spent from 2007 to now going LOLOLOL FUCK YOUR GYGAX THIS IS D&D DONE PROPERLY FIRST ONE I EVER BOTHERED TO PLAY LOLOLOLOL get fired as customers, and I've seen that.  I don't mean people who like all D&D.  Steve, the guy who plays in our playtest group?  He'll play any D&D, any time, anywhere.  And that's awesome.  No, I mean the AMs, the TCOs, the bulk of...well, fuck it, every person who posts in trad games at SA - all, fired as customers.

I never expected a "great" D&D out of Wizards because it wasn't going to happen.  All I expected was a good one, that fit the above criteria either by accident or design, and so far it's met those expectations handily.

In welcoming back "old-school" gamers, from 3.5/Pathfinder players all the way down to It's Holmes' Way or the Highway types, or at least trying to coax them back and defenstrating the hardcore 4vengers, they've made me happy.  Also, reprinting the AD&D core books but it remains to be seen if that's the start of re-embracing all forms of D&D or just paying it lip service.

So, again, I don't care that the actual rules are "meh".  It's what they accomplished as a side effect.

Judging from the playtest material:

Would I rather play this than 4e: Hell Fuck yes.
Would I rather play this than 3e: Bloody hell, yes, yes yes.
Would I rather play this than 2e: Have I ever played 2e? Fuck knows, I say yes.
Would I rather play this than AD&D: Yes, this is much better
Would I rather play this than 1e: Yes by miles
Would I rather play this than OD&D: Pretty much yes.

All they need to do now is not colossally cock it up to the point I turn the playtest document into a whole game and sell it for huge amounts of coke and whores.*


*Why don't whores like pepsi anyway?

(Fix your custom avatar title already, Sacrosanct )

I think the situation with Pathfinder (the far bigger factor) and the Old School Renaissance is unprecedented in D&D publishing history. And almost guarantees a meh reaction to any new edition among existing gamers.

3e and 4e are not approachable to novices especially for folks returning to D&D to play with their kids. As simplistic the original Holmes/Moldavy/Mentzer rules were, they were the easiest to learn of any edition.

So it boils down who is the audience? What is the market?

Are parents returning to play D&D with their kids a big factor?

Has another gamer generation turned and do we need to market to novices in competition with other forms of entertainment?

What are the organized play fanbase are asking for?

Do we limit the new edition to a simple set of core rules. Implement it in more detail for Organized play and one Setting a year? And focus on reprints for the other segments?

What the impact of a hugely successful AD&D reprint?

What the impact of a not so successful AD&D reprint?

Is the next edition going to open up to third party licenses?

Any of this stuff as profitable compared to what Wizards could be doing in other areas?

Any buyers for the D&D brand?

How about keeping the brand name, and selling the rights to the rules.

Right now my Magic Eight ball is coming with "The future is cloudy. Ask again later."

Quote from: thedungeondelver;549684So, again, I don't care that the actual rules are "meh".  It's what they accomplished as a side effect.

Agreed, the fact that old school gaming got the mindshare it did in the D&D Next ramp up  was very much to the benefit to the old term viability of older editions.

Quote from: estar;549687Right now my Magic Eight ball is coming with "The future is cloudy. Ask again later."

Closest to the pin: estar gets the point for this round.

All of this comes from the need to generate insane amounts of revenue from what is, despite the big brand name, a niche hobby product.

WOTC helped created the split fanbase and now they are stuck with it.

If 5E becomes the glorious unifying edition of doom and sells in the 3E numbers it still won't be enough to satisfy the profit lust.

Tabletop rpgs are niche hobby products best left to small companies with realistic sales expectations.

Hm. Good points.