|
From LivingDice.com:
snippet:
Scott Rouse D&D Sr. Brand Manager put on a one hour seminar regarding 4th Edition Dungeons and Dragons. I am liveblogging, so forgive spelling errors.2008 Global Brand Study US and Canada and part of Europe.
Aided Awareness 89% (brand recognition)
80% WOW
89% D&D
54% have played D&D
94% think D&D is the same or better than other games (WOW, etc)
56% of respondents have high interest in buying D&D products in the next six months
For 2009 will continue to market to existing players and hope to have a halo effect on other new gamers.
More can be found at the site. I like how Mr. Rouse responded to comments over at EN World.
I thought it was interesting someone asked Scott if they would consider supporting both editions. He didn't respond but hopefully he at least thought about it. I also feel from his comments that he truly doesn't understand why the 3.5 crowd hasn't jumped up and down for joy at 4th edition.
No I read it on one of those links you made. I read through the whole threads it was in there somewhere.
"We really want top counter the perception that D&D is a tactical, combat focused war game. We want to show off the roleplaying potential with the system. I have been told Robin has written an excellent chapter on storytelling inthe DMG 2 and we hope to demonstrate the RP potential of the system in other ways including a 4e version of Village of Homlet."
This quote here, is the most exciting thing i've seen come out of WotC in a while. It affirms many of the complaints, us hold outs have had. It warms this Gamers heart that the Wizards seem to be listening.
I loved the DMG2 for 3.5 I'm excited to see what the DMG2 looks like for 4e.
Eric
|
|
One chapter in the DMG2 ain't gonna do jack in terms of changing the general feel of 4e. When they start having roleplaying XP as a part of the equations for adventuring design, then they're getting somewhere.
For right now it's just smoke and mirrors, trying to appease (or look like appeasing) the 3e fans who didn't convert to 4e for one reason or another.
Overall our strategy for 2009 will be to continue to market to the existing D&D fans. Lapsed players, current players of other editions, and fans of the brand who participate in other ways like novels and video games. Our hope is that as D&D becomes a multi-generational brand with players now becoming moms & dads, the next generation starts being recruited with in existing playing families. we also will get some halo effect acquistion through our efforts focused on core fans. In 2010 we’ll start to focus more on pure acquisition on non-players.
You know, I understand that Hasbro/WotC is a big company, but can't they coach this guy to talk a little bit more down to the level of the average gamer?
To me this is not about edition wars, this is about a company losing touch. Again, I feel the corporate-speak approach and tone puts off a lot of gamers and Paizo's personal (small company) approach really makes gamers feel like they are a part of something.
One chapter in the DMG2 ain't gonna do jack in terms of changing the general feel of 4e. When they start having roleplaying XP as a part of the equations for adventuring design, then they're getting somewhere.
For right now it's just smoke and mirrors, trying to appease (or look like appeasing) the 3e fans who didn't convert to 4e for one reason or another.
To play Devil's Advocate here, 4th does have rules for quest XP, which can be for gained for objectives from roleplaying, and skill challenges, which again can be RP focused, award XP as well.
|
I think a rewrite of the truncated skill system and non-combat options full stop would serve better than a "DM's guide to story telling". I think he misses the point. That the problem, obvious enough for him to note, is that some DM's find the mechanics are part of the hurdle to good story telling in 4E. I'm one of those who strongly see D&D 4E as a skirmish level wargame veiled as an RPG.
I would like to see an "Skills & Powers" book released that covered nothing combat related. Happy for these to be class specific in some cases with the whole at-will, encounter (non-combat), and daily.
S.
I am not really a big-fan of non-combat skills or powers because they distract from role-playing. Why try to convince someone not be murder you when you could just roll a diplomacy check. I absolutely prefer for the system to the combat and leave the role-playing to me.
|
I am not really a big-fan of non-combat skills or powers because they distract from role-playing. Why try to convince someone not be murder you when you could just roll a diplomacy check. I absolutely prefer for the system to the combat and leave the role-playing to me.
Agreed. Rules are for combat. Role-play is for me and the DM to work out.
"Roll to see if I'm getting drunk!" <ugh>
I have the 4E books but am doing Pathfinder. That said, you all might find this relevant.
In a few campaigns (in 2nd and 3rd edition) I've experimented with ways to encourage noncombat activity.
One method was awarding action points based only on non-combat tasks that PCs completed in service of their deity. Each deity had a list of a dozen tasks that worshipers of that deity learned about and often strove to complete. Easy tasks awarded 1 action point; the complex or hard ones gave up to 5 points. For example, the PC who worshiped a dragon deity did a bunch of things to convince a dragon to let him ride it. This made deities a lot more relevant in the campaign because if two PCs worshiped the same deity they worked together to get the tasks done. It was an interesting experiment.
Another method: I would give a +0% to +20% XP bonus to a PC after each session based on pure role-play activity, such as speaking in character, dealing with your character's background or long term goals, taking up a romance, etc. Some of this could occur in combat, but it mostly came up as player-driven initiatives when in town. When the session ended, we would all offer up who did memorable role-play so it didn't feel like me the DM playing favorites. The session after I announced this, the two power gamers in the group (who rarely "wasted time" on such stuff) started doing a bunch of noncombat RP and were actually rather good at it!
A third method was allowing players to pick a personality ("temperament") for their PC. Each temperament had a list of typical activities. For example, a Protector would plan and prep before adventures, act to rescue allies, seek to get the party to act in a coordinated fashion, and so forth. Acting in support of the temperament earned XP. And each PC had another temperament that was a "shadow side"; if a PC did those activities then he would lose XP. I used this in lieu of alignment. This generally encouraged participation and breathed some life into the PCs, and although I haven't used it much since found I liked it more than alignment.
Anyway, my impression from these experiments: create prompts and potential rewards for noncombat role-play, and the players will be motivated to fill in the details as they like.
I have always used the non-combat social skills as a guide post for the characters. When DMing and a player wants to convince a King of something or bluff a villain I always encourage a level of Role-Playing. Then when they make a skill check I offer a Action Dice like bounus on how well they RPed the situation.
I would think that if one feels that the Social skills are pointless in D&D than why have a Charisma score? Do I really need a Charisma score to determine my personnel interactions?
By definition Charisma should fall under the same judgment folks give the Social Skills:
Mr. Webster defines Charisma:
1 : a personal magic of leadership arousing special popular loyalty or enthusiasm for a public figure (as a political leader)
2 : a special magnetic charm or appeal <the charisma of a popular actor>
Just my thoughts though, Like Ive said I have always used the social skills as a Guide post for characters, not a replacement for RPing.
Eric
|
|
I think they will listen, there has been quite a bit of discord from current gamers about the "wargamey" feel to 4E and that they have indicated is their first market. My prediction is that 4E will be the shortest perhaps of the D&D product cycles (not counting 3E --> 3.5E), and that 5E will be an excellent game combining the best of the new system (4E) with some elements from older editions. 4E suffers from one major problem, it's the first iteration of a new system. There will be terrible flaws (see the skill challenge system as originally written) that are inherent and not unexpected in anything new and novel. The feedback (even negative) from gamers will help shape the next edition to come. I think Scott Rouse perhaps lives in a marketing persons utopia if he believes that 4E IS the D&D that generations to come will be playing.
S.
I could see WotC dropping the whole "Edition" ideal. Stop calling it D&D 4e and just call it D&D. I could see new rule expansions but no longer calling them "Editions". I really think 4e is such a leap in a new direction it will be hard to "Go Back".
Opinion only though...not that the Internet is'nt full of that.
Eric
"DM's guide to story telling".
Coming next: The Chess player's guide to story telling.
Now chess is a roleplaying game, too! And the miniatures are way cheaper, too. :D
