Since WotC will was not happy with neither 3.0 nor 3.5 edition and maybe after some years will not be happy with 4.0 and perhaps there will be a 4.5 edition. I was just wondering which one will be the definitive, perfect, finished and nothing missed D&D edition.
|
Never going to happen.
WOTC needs to publish new core books every few years to keep them selling decently (they are the only books that generate decent lifespans and cash returns as products, basically). If core books don't sell steadily, the whole game line stops being published.
The whole "our new edition roxxorz" and "the previous one is so flawed" stuff is just marketing crap, basically. To generate and sustain a steady revenue out of the brand is the real bottom-line.
|
Never going to happen.
WOTC needs to publish new core books every few years to keep them selling decently (they are the only products that generate a decent lifespan as a product, basically). If core books don't sell steadily, the whole game line stops being published.
The whole "better edition" and "the previous one is so flawed" stuff is just marketing crap, basically. To generate and sustain a steady revenue out of the brand is the real bottom-line.
Yep. That is what a business must do to run - keep up an income stream.
|
|
Monte Cook wrote an article on his website when 3.5 was released, saying that WotC was planning 3.5 before 3.0 even came out. The rules were intentionally flawed, or left with issues to fix, so that a few years down the line they could make everybody buy all new books.
They won't stop making new versions of the game. Unless of course people stop buying them.
42E
Monte Cook wrote an article on his website when 3.5 was released, saying that WotC was planning 3.5 before 3.0 even came out. The rules were intentionally flawed, or left with issues to fix, so that a few years down the line they could make everybody buy all new books.
They won't stop making new versions of the game. Unless of course people stop buying them.
Hmmm... link please. Sounds unlikely.
|
|
Okay-
http://www.ptolus.com/arch_review26.html
edit: Actually after rereading the article (it's been a few years), 3.0 wasn't intentionally flawed. More like they knew there were some things that were going to confuse people. But 3.5 was planned to fix those issues (and sell more books) before 3.0 even came out. And I'm sure they're planning to come out with some kind of new edition/revision (4.5, 5, 4x4) in a few short years.
Perfection is not from this world...
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
No - they won't "need" to; they've got the DI to push "immediate fixes" out with, and the annual "rules updates" to remove the need for future editions, unless they decide to compile all of it at some point.
Which, I fear, means that you're 1) paying for Errata and 2) you're books will be out of date as the 'official' rules are altered on DI. Think of Polymorph for 3.x for what I mean.
Basketball (and other sports) have been played almost the same way from 100+ years and no game is the same than other. Rules have not changed for this "games" and still crowds go to the stadiums to watch them.
I don't know if the analogy is right but I don't remember having playing an D&D adventure twice the same.
Maybe the problem is not at rules but in the way they are used or the flavor of the adventures.
Common sense tells me that many games can prevail through generations without any change to the rules, but only when there is not money in the middle.
So my conclusion is that no edition of D&D will stay, all of them will have a life cycle of 10 years and later will die to bring another and to bring more money to the owners of the franchise, at that time.
Never going to happen.
WOTC needs to publish new core books every few years to keep them selling decently (they are the only books that generate decent lifespans and cash returns as products, basically). If core books don't sell steadily, the whole game line stops being published.
The whole "our new edition roxxorz" and "the previous one is so flawed" stuff is just marketing crap, basically. To generate and sustain a steady revenue out of the brand is the real bottom-line.
Bingo!
Basketball (and other sports) have been played almost the same way from 100+ years and no game is the same than other. Rules have not changed for this "games" and still crowds go to the stadiums to watch them.
Whoa mate. I'm gonna stop you right there. Basketball hasn't changed in the last 100 years? If you were to watch a basketball game from 60 years ago you wouldn't recognize it 'cause you wouldn't see any dribbling or any jump shots. The game's changed dramatically even in the last 30 years, what with the invention of the shot clock and the 3 point shot.
What you just said with your analogy is "Nobody eats lobsters in Maine. Therefore, 4th edition sucks." Not only was your analogy wrong, it didn't make much sense.
I don't mind hearing reasoned discussions about why people aren't looking forward to 4E, but that kind of claptrap just makes any decent argument you may have sound silly.
El Skootro
No - they won't "need" to; they've got the DI to push "immediate fixes" out with, and the annual "rules updates" to remove the need for future editions, unless they decide to compile all of it at some point.Which, I fear, means that you're 1) paying for Errata and 2) you're books will be out of date as the 'official' rules are altered on DI. Think of Polymorph for 3.x for what I mean.
Polymorph fixes were free, at least.
Never going to happen.
WOTC needs to publish new core books every few years to keep them selling decently (they are the only books that generate decent lifespans and cash returns as products, basically). If core books don't sell steadily, the whole game line stops being published.
The whole "our new edition roxxorz" and "the previous one is so flawed" stuff is just marketing crap, basically. To generate and sustain a steady revenue out of the brand is the real bottom-line.
Not necessarily.
Think of how long D&D lasted before WotC. Think of how long each edition lasted before they switched. Even still, the edition changes were mostly "addition" changes. Nothing was taken away from 1E, not much really, but material was "added" to 1E enough to warrant is as 2E. 2E to 3E was a mechanics overhaul, but the game remained the same game. And look how awesome it did for D&D.
Also, the difference is they weren't going for huge profits, like WotC was. They were writing the material for the game, for the love of the game, and the many authors there stood for that principle and ideal.
4E was not necessary at all, other than to generate a boatload of income. Ideals, as we all know, don't generate millions of dollars.
3E could've kept going another 10 years, maybe even 15. Would they make any money? After some time, probably not. That is, if they spewed out a ton of crap. But if they made sure their products were of outstanding quality, 3E would've kept going and generating enough profits. Maybe break even.
But that's not WotC wants. Hence, it was always a mistake since day 1 to have WotC purchase the D&D rights. I really wish some other company had it, but it's way too late now.
D&D players will either keep playing or stop. And for everyone that stops, another picks it up. WotC is trying to push that envelope. They're a dirty, greedy corporation. What more can you expect?
I don't think you should look at editions in terms of how long they lasted, but in terms of the number of products produced for them. 1E and 2E may have lasted longer than 3E, but when you take into account third party products I am sure that there is more 3E material around than there is 1E and 2E combined. Assuming one were to attempt to purchase and use all the 3E material available it would take a consumer a long, long, long time to get through it all. My point is, that now that dnd is run by a company that puts out more material than the previous incarnations of dnd it is logical that new versions of the game will be released more often, because the true life span of a game is measured not purely in time, but in terms of time and the number of books published for said game.
I think having a big company like WotC publishing dnd has a lot of advantages.
1. colour art work
2. wide distribution (you can get books easily)
3. reliable release dates
4. the ability to produce lots of material for the game= enough options for there to be pretty much something for everyone.
The whole notion of authors writing dnd material for the love of the game and not being interested in profits is not necessarily a good thing. If the game is going to suceed there needs to be some good busniess sense behind it (WofC current business sense being an obvious point of contention at the moment), and no author really wants to work for free. I'm not going to hold a grudge against a person or company because they want to make a profit. Though, I might depending on how they choose to make that profit. I have more problems with Paizo and WotC having their books printed in countries like China than I do with them releasing new books.
Accusing them of being a "dirty and greedy" corporation is a bit lame IMO because every company is greedy, that is the nature of capitalism. Of course they want to make money. However, the people that make the game are passionate about it and I think do care about making a game that is better and more fun to play (I don't know if they will suceed, but I am confident that this is their goal). Why would you accuse a publishing company of being "greedy and dirty" for publishing new books and wanting to try to sell them to you? The nerve of them. Those bastards.
Never going to happen.
WOTC needs to publish new core books every few years to keep them selling decently (they are the only books that generate decent lifespans and cash returns as products, basically). If core books don't sell steadily, the whole game line stops being published.
The whole "our new edition roxxorz" and "the previous one is so flawed" stuff is just marketing crap, basically. To generate and sustain a steady revenue out of the brand is the real bottom-line.
Not necessarily.
Think of how long D&D lasted before WotC. Think of how long each edition lasted before they switched. Even still, the edition changes were mostly "addition" changes. Nothing was taken away from 1E, not much really, but material was "added" to 1E enough to warrant is as 2E. 2E to 3E was a mechanics overhaul, but the game remained the same game. And look how awesome it did for D&D.
Also, the difference is they weren't going for huge profits, like WotC was. They were writing the material for the game, for the love of the game, and the many authors there stood for that principle and ideal.
4E was not necessary at all, other than to generate a boatload of income. Ideals, as we all know, don't generate millions of dollars.
3E could've kept going another 10 years, maybe even 15. Would they make any money? After some time, probably not. That is, if they spewed out a ton of crap. But if they made sure their products were of outstanding quality, 3E would've kept going and generating enough profits. Maybe break even.
But that's not WotC wants. Hence, it was always a mistake since day 1 to have WotC purchase the D&D rights. I really wish some other company had it, but it's way too late now.
D&D players will either keep playing or stop. And for everyone that stops, another picks it up. WotC is trying to push that envelope. They're a dirty, greedy corporation. What more can you expect?
I'm sure they're planning to come out with some kind of new edition/revision (4.5, 5, 4x4) in a few short years.
Wizards' own Scott Rouse himself said that there would be no 4.5e!
*rereads what he just wrote*
Wait till 2010, 2011 tops.
Won't be "4.5e", but "4e Revised". "We were not technically lying. Never mind the forked tail!" ;-)
I believe that the perfect edition cannot be created. Simply impossible. Can't do it. Not by humans. There'll always be room for improvement.
I was just wondering which one will be the definitive, perfect, finished and nothing missed D&D edition.
I think 4/e will prove to be easier and quicker to play, which is likely a good thing in the end (though I think it will have lots of not-so-good parts).
I love 3.5. It's balance between realism and playability is just about perfect for me and my players, but we usually favor more complex rules. Despite my fondness for it, I think 3.x went too far in the direction of realism. My group also loves Rolemaster, which will say a lot to many of you.
IMO 2/e was an admirable but clumsy attempt to fix both realism and playability issues. 1/e ignored a lot of stuff (like skills for non-thieves), but 2/e started as a messy hodgepodge of rules, and actually became worse with time.
All that said, the question is probably irrelevant. D&D is a product, designed to make money. It will only make money if it continues to generate new editions (no matter how good the edition before was).
IMHO -- for what it's worth :)
the question is probably irrelevant. D&D is a product, designed to make money. It will only make money if it continues to generate new editions (no matter how good the edition before was).I was just wondering which one will be the definitive, perfect, finished and nothing missed D&D edition.
Yep that is the very point, NONE will be.
i hope never
that which is perfect is dead
- everything alive has to change constantly
Here, here. I'm with feytharn. Litature changes, movies change the way we play games change. It's healthy and alive when it changes. An RPG is not chess, to flex the imagination muscles the rpg games we play should change as well. Keep it fresh and new and i'll keep playing.
|
|
I believe that the perfect edition cannot be created. Simply impossible. Can't do it. Not by humans. There'll always be room for improvement.
True but why go through effort to "fix" the parts that are not broken? WHat was so "wrong" that it forced the issue for a new version of the ruels when the current version was still being played and even the poorer elements that were being fostered by WotC were being purchased?
Since WotC will was not happy with neither 3.0 nor 3.5 edition and maybe after some years will not be happy with 4.0 and perhaps there will be a 4.5 edition. I was just wondering which one will be the definitive, perfect, finished and nothing missed D&D edition.
What an easy question.
It'll be 7.64 edition, of course.
What an easy question.
It'll be 7.64 edition, of course.
Good one.
D&D 7.64: The Magic Bullet
What? 7.62 isn't the magic bullet?
What gun fires a 7.64 millimeter shell?
What? 7.62 isn't the magic bullet?
What gun fires a 7.64 millimeter shell?
I know what calibre I don't think is the ultimate one: FN Fourth editioN
D&D 7.64: The Magic Bullet
What? 7.62 isn't the magic bullet?
It's 7.64 in the new edition... ;-)
D&D 7.64: The Magic BulletWhat? 7.62 isn't the magic bullet?It's 7.64 in the new edition... ;-)
You'll need to buy new firearms in the new edition.
You're already playing it.
Not to say that 3.5 or any of it's predecessors are perfect, but if you've been playing D&D for years with gamers both new and old with your plethora of mutually agreed upon house rules, then mission accomplished.
You'll need to buy new firearms in the new edition.D&D 7.64: The Magic BulletWhat? 7.62 isn't the magic bullet?It's 7.64 in the new edition... ;-)
Don't worry, the new 7.64 firearms are easier to use and require less maintenence.
|
Which, I fear, means that you're 1) paying for Errata and 2) you're books will be out of date as the 'official' rules are altered on DI. Think of Polymorph for 3.x for what I mean.
One possibility that might make this a good thing: re-downloads of updated editions.
If you buy PHB4e and pay the nominal charge for the e-book, it would be nice to think that any errata would be plugged directly into the e-book (perhaps redlined) and be made available for download (again).
You're screwed on the hardbound, but at least would be able to keep track of changes in your e-book.
|
|
Accusing them of being a "dirty and greedy" corporation is a bit lame IMO because every company is greedy, that is the nature of capitalism. Of course they want to make money. However, the people that make the game are passionate about it and I think do care about making a game that is better and...
Yeah, well, that argument might hold water in my mind if the company in question had been honest with its customers from the get-go. Earlier this year, even, when questioned about the existence or pending release of a new edition of the rules, WotC assured, assured the public that, "No, there's no new edition planned, not for a long time." I guess that the term "long time" is a bit shorter than I might have imagined.
WotC is indeed a corporation, and the business of any corporation is to make money. Paizo is a corporation. But the difference between a corporation that cares about its customers, answers their questions as honestly and quickly as possible, and genuinely encourages the health of the hobby for the hobby's sake rather than that of profit, is clear as day to me.
|
|
As of Origins, the party line was, 'Read my lips, No New Edition!'
By GenCon that changed to, 'Announcing 4E! Which we've been playtesting for *over a year!*'
Which, frankly, doesn't bug me. I also work in corporate America. If a marketing guy's lips are moving he's;
1) Lying,
2) Trying to sell you something,
3) Wants in your pants,
4) All of the above.
It's just bad business to say, 'Hey, we've got a full schedule of books coming out this year, please buy them, and, oh yeah, they'll all be obsolete this time next year, 'cause of the sweeping rules changes...'
What *would* make sense, and be pretty radical, is if the writers of the books on schedule had been tasked to write 3.5 versions *and* 4.0 update pamphlets, since the 4.0 rules were already being finalized as they worked, and when the 4.0 core books come out the WotC website were to release update guides for their last few months releases, to make them 'hot-swappable' to 4.0. The articles over on the WotC website adapting new class options like the Duskblade and Scout to Eberron, for instance, would be an example of this sort of thinking, with the flavor text of Elder Evils being tweaked to adjust to the new points of light setting, and the stat-blocks for the critters being shown as they would appear in 4.0.
Basketball (and other sports) have been played almost the same way from 100+ years and no game is the same than other. Rules have not changed for this "games" and still crowds go to the stadiums to watch them.
Basketball was invented in 1891 and they used a soccer ball and a peach basket on top of a post. In 1893 they replaced the peach basket with metal hoops but the net had a sealed bottom that had to be released by the ref each time a basket was made. A backboard was added in 1894. The bottomless net was added in 1913 as well as the larger ball we now know. In 1932 the 10 second rule was adopted. Until 1937, a center jump was held after every field goal. Beginning in 1937, the defensive team received the ball out-of-bounds after a field goal.
In 1935, a rule was adopted that stopped any offensive player from standing in the free throw lane for more than three seconds. In 1955, the foul lane was widened to 12 feet from the previous 6 feet.
The version of basketball that we know today an evolution of the one that was played over 100 years ago and it continues to evolve just like almost every other sport in the world.
Games do not ever get perfect. They do however, continue to be perfected.
Since WotC will was not happy with neither 3.0 nor 3.5 edition and maybe after some years will not be happy with 4.0 and perhaps there will be a 4.5 edition. I was just wondering which one will be the definitive, perfect, finished and nothing missed D&D edition.
I've already got it, and so do you. It's the one you choose to play.
I feel the same way. I wish Wizards of the coast never bought TSR. Maybe the fans can buy the rights to D&D and free wizards of the burden of writing all their poop.
Would there have been a 3rd edition if WotC hadn't purchased TSR? Maybe, but maybe not. We might not even be having this conversation if they hadn't. Paizo almost certainly wouldn't be around in its current form.
Some other company might have purchased TSR, but I highly doubt that D&D would be what it is today. It might have been better, but there is also a large chance it could have been far worse, or even dead (dead being relative...as in no new official material).
|
Ryan Dancey said that TSR was actually working on a "third edition" when WotC bought them.... he looked through all the notes that were turned over when he took over. He said it was really going to be a "tweak" to 2nd edition. I am guessing that makes the people who dislike 3e even madder, of course, but that's what he said. Then when WotC took over, they tossed it all and had, basically, a clean slate with very few instructions as to how to start.
Interestingly enough, they did some good, solid research. He said that the only reason Magic Missile still exists the way it does is because it would have made so many people mad to change it to be consistent with other spells in 3e, for example.
Here's the podcast where I heard this information:
link
Basketball (and other sports) have been played almost the same way from 100+ years and no game is the same than other. Rules have not changed for this "games" and still crowds go to the stadiums to watch them.Whoa mate. I'm gonna stop you right there. Basketball hasn't changed in the last 100 years? If you were to watch a basketball game from 60 years ago you wouldn't recognize it 'cause you wouldn't see any dribbling or any jump shots. The game's changed dramatically even in the last 30 years, what with the invention of the shot clock and the 3 point shot.
What you just said with your analogy is "Nobody eats lobsters in Maine. Therefore, 4th edition sucks." Not only was your analogy wrong, it didn't make much sense.
I don't mind hearing reasoned discussions about why people aren't looking forward to 4E, but that kind of claptrap just makes any decent argument you may have sound silly.
El Skootro
Every change made to Basketball was an evolutive one. That is, every change was made to improve the game and make it more interesting but no change was a revision, deletion or even worse a change of the original principle of the game.
That is my point, 4th edition is a total revision and deletion of several principles that have given identity to the game for more than 30 years. And please don't come with the old estatement "you can't talk about a game you haven't seen or played" because on the Internet there is enough information about the new edition to know how it will be. Excuse me if I sound a bit in defense position I don't intend that.