D&D 4E DnD 4E DOA?

[Turjan]

In fact, 4e would just mean that I could finally stop buying 3e books and complete my set and stop having to learn the rules and options from the new book-of-the-month.

This reflects my thoughts quite well. I know that I'd most probably buy the core books of a new edition, just because I'd be curious. On the other hand, I wouldn't buy any supplements anymore. I've got enough of those for the rest of my gaming life .

 

[Psion]

I agree on the Turn Undead item. There needs to be a better system to do that.

You should have seen the 3.0 playtest version...

 

[A'koss]

I don't want a new edition of D&D any time soon, but there's a lot of things they can do improve 3.0/3.5, and further revising and extending the d20 system.

"4.0" changes (assuming a d20-esque 4.0)
- Find some way of getting multiclass spellcasters to work reasonably well without resorting to wonky PrCs

Agreed.

- Consolidate the skill list and/or give classes no less than 4 skill points/level

Also good...

- Get rid of d4 hit dice

Not only that but the number of HPs / level should be a much smaller range with a higher minimum (even static). The second problem with HPs are Con bonuses which contibute to balance issues at higher levels. I'm of the opinion that classes should have a fairly high number of HPs (Wizards ~10/lvl, Warriors ~14/lvl) with Con modifying your healing and general recovery rate and not HPs (or perhaps just at 1st level).

- Find a better Turn Undead mechanic

I say just remove it entirely (it's clunky and it's not like clerics don't have spellpower to rely on...) or turn it to straight holy damage.

- Try and simplify combat a bit

One houserule I've always liked was that characters have one BAB modifier and you must choose to make multiple attacks. Each extra attack imposes a cumulative -4 penalty to hit on *all* attacks. BAB +16 (1 atttack), BAB +12 (2 attacks), etc. This helps speed things up at higher levels so that you're not rolling a bunch of worthless attacks when you don't need to.

- Get rid of redundant mechanics (why have both SR and saves, or DR and AC, given an abstract damage system)

It's funny you should mention that... I've thought much the same thing. SR in my homebrew is simply a bonus to your Save vs Magic. Roll 10 higher than you need to make your save and the effects are cut in half (or quarter as the case may be). Roll 20 higher than you need to make your save and you avoid all the effects of the magic. DR... I still kinda like, but instead of a static penalty to damage we use "die progression" for damage and DR just reduces the die damage you inflict by x number of steps.
...

"3.75" changes
- Find some happy medium between overly nerfed 3.5 spells (mostly the buff spells) and their 3.0 counterparts

I actually approve of the nerfed effects myself, I would also go as far as changing all Save or Nerf spells so that inflict a different kind of damage rather than all or nothing.

- - Do something to make Sorcerers interesting

How about get rid of them entirely and make a proper Wizard class that ditches the fire and forget lodestone.

- - Make elves, half-elves, and half-orcs a little better

Perhaps, but it all comes out in a wash in the long term...

Cheers!

 

[Sholari]

Was Shadowrun 3rd a big flop or something? I wasn't aware of that...

Nisarg

It's by no means as popular as it was during it's 2nd edition heyday.

 

[Sholari]

I really doubt that WotC is using these boards to gather marketing research.

Kane

You really don't think companies look at this stuff, eh?

http://www.intelliseek.com/customersname.asp

 

[Nisarg]

EnWorld doesn't represent their market? Wow that's crazy. I thought that this was a message board almost excluivly DEDICATED to the game which they produce. If that's doesn't represent core market I'm not sure what does then. There have been many polls here also. How old are you? How much do you spend on gaming? etc. All of those are pointing out "who" is the traget audience for D&D. The fact is that they DO listen to these boards. Almost every game designer does in fact have a screen name for these boards and posts from time to time. Look how quickly Paizo posted in the thread about crappy deliver service.

Nope sorry, ENworld does not represent the target market for Wizards.

At least, I'm fairly sure they don't want their target market to be "a few thousand absolutely obsessed fanboys who are so dedicated to RPGs that they obsess for hours about the topics on message boards".
Because, see, if they cater to that extreme fringe (ie. the people on this board), they will end up alienating their REAL target market, which is "teens and young adults who have a variety of interests but are willing to spend several hours a week/month playing RPGs".

Why would they want the latter, and not the former, as their true "key" market? Two reasons:
1. The drooling fanboys are far FAR fewer than the regular players. We are something like 1% (if Wizard's stats are to be believed) or less of the total player base for D&D. Most people who play D&D would never dream of going to a place like ENworld. Most don't even know ENworld exists, and wouldn't care if they were to find out.
2. If Wizards caters to the fanboys, it will create games that will appeal to what the fanboys want, but not really what the regular market wants (stuff that is more intensive, more consuming, more complicated crunch, more detailed/sophisticated fluff, etc. etc.). It will then lose the regular market. On the other hand, if Wizards continues to cater to the regular market by producing watered-down dumbed-down products that appeal to them, the drooling fanboys will bitch and moan on forums like this one, and in the end they will drop their $90 a month on RPG books anyways... and even if they don't, they're still far far fewer than the hordes of "regular" players.

Sorry, but when it comes to being representative, we are not. Those of us who come to forums are the "lunatic fringe".

And a company basing its business decisions on us would be like the people behind Star Trek handing over the creative reins to the Official Starship Technical Details Squad and Klingon Grammar School of the RateMyStarfleetUniform.com forums. They would produce things that a handful of the absolutely obsessed socially marginalized would enjoy, and that the mass market would run away screaming and tearing their hairs from.

Nisarg

 

[Sholari]

Nope sorry, ENworld does not represent the target market for Wizards.

At least, I'm fairly sure they don't want their target market to be "a few thousand absolutely obsessed fanboys who are so dedicated to RPGs that they obsess for hours about the topics on message boards".


Nisarg

Or some might call them influentials...

http://www.nopworld.com/news.asp?go=news_item&key=41

There are at least more than a few people here that are well-known in the rpg community.

 

[Crothian]

At least, I'm fairly sure they don't want their target market to be "a few thousand absolutely obsessed fanboys who are so dedicated to RPGs that they obsess for hours about the topics on message boards".

I'm pretty sure that even Wizards books don't sell well enough to consider a few thousand cutomers not their target market. And the people here really are not obssessed fanboys. Sure they like gaming and D&D but here at least there is critical discussion and noit blind loyalty. For that, you need to go to the publishers own messageboards.

Because, see, if they cater to that extreme fringe (ie. the people on this board), they will end up alienating their REAL target market, which is "teens and young adults who have a variety of interests but are willing to spend several hours a week/month playing RPGs".

And that age bracket and people with a variety of interests fits a lot of the people on these baords. So, the fringe becomes the REAL target audience.

Why would they want the latter, and not the former, as their true "key" market? Two reasons:
1. The drooling fanboys are far FAR fewer than the regular players. We are something like 1% (if Wizard's stats are to be believed) or less of the total player base for D&D. Most people who play D&D would never dream of going to a place like ENworld. Most don't even know ENworld exists, and wouldn't care if they were to find out.

Ya, but also consider that that 1% of the players is buying like 25% of the products. Most casual gamers don't buy the products like us "fanboys" do.

You have some points, but it is funny you are quoting stats you don't seem to beleive. Like it or not we are part of the market. And we are vocal so many things that we say does get heard and reacted to. THe vocal minority rules over the silent majority.

 

[Staffan]

1. The drooling fanboys are far FAR fewer than the regular players. We are something like 1% (if Wizard's stats are to be believed) or less of the total player base for D&D.

We're likely not to be their main market, but they'd be fools not to at least listen to us. We might be a small part of their customer base, but we're a highly dedicated part that spend far more money than most of their customers.

Not saying they should indulge our every whim (which would be impossible given the number of whims we have around these parts), but they're fools if they don't at least pay attention.

 

[Romnipotent]

Right now Im playing more GURPS.... I just come here as a courtesy mainly for ideas and to throw in my 2 bobs worth