A New Edition? I'm Shocked!

Well, maybe not that shocked. Okay, let's face it, it was inevitable.

In 2007, I finally made the trip to Gencon. I write about that elsewhere on this page, but it was an opportunity for me to meet so many people in the RPG business that I respect. Tom Moldvay had passed away earlier that year, so I knew I had to go when the opportunity presented itself.

Anyway, I was there when something occurred that I wasn't anticipating. The Wizards announced 4e D&D was on the way. I admit I'm not as in the loop about these things. When the Basic line was dropped in the mid 90's, I walked away from the table. What was left of my group was pretty much gone anyway, so I played the D&D computer games and continued to add books to my collection when I could.

Here's the thing, though. They introduced 3e in 2000. Some complained, and some hailed it as the update that was needed. It was a good thing for the game. Plus, The Wizards were the ones who sort of ended the Gygax/Arneson feud (maybe feud is a little strong?). What I mean to say is Gary and Dave were at the table together at Gencon that year talking about D&D, Gary wrote an article for Dragon on the history of the game, which I have. Both of their names were at the front of the new books as founders of the game. Both got a chance to contribute to the game going forward, though Gary opted to do his own thing. Dave returned to Blackmoor with new books. Both were involved in the two movies as well.

I liked that about 3e. People went back to playing when Wizards sold to Hasbro and suddenly in 2004, 3.5 came about. Time for new books. There was complaining. Can't say I blame people. I'm of the opinion the core books should have a run longer than 4 years, like maybe 10? But people still played, and the vibe I got was one where the people who played had fun. That's the point, isn't it? The impression was they would stay with that edition for a while when suddenly, in 2007, the announcement came for 4e.

What is going on here? Do you need me to spell it out for you? It's pretty obvious that Hasbro has higher expectations for this franchise. TSR probably would have stayed with what they had for a while and supported it with the usual supplements. WotC before the sale probably would have done so as well. But the bigger corporation has bigger expectations. This has been mentioned by people who know more about this than I do.

There were plans for a virtual table, new legal documents for third party support in an effort to put the old OGL in the past. Hype for 4e buried versions of the game people like. I recall seeing some of that at Gencon. Of course, isn't that the point when selling the new version, to tell people why they should switch? From what I understand, initial sales were good. At this point, I was focusing on other things.

While I was gone, Paizo had taken the OGL and cleverly put out Pathfinder as an RPG to support their adventure paths. In looking at past threads on forums, there were plenty of predictions of failure. But it was a brilliant move by Paizo. They opened the door for people who preferred that style of play to stick around, and people did. Still, 4e enthusiasts cried foul. How dare Paizo! Ha! How dare Wizards leave the door open for this to happen with the OGL. It was a brilliant move by Paizo. They became the company of the little guy, AND they ate into D&D business.

Wizards answer was Essentials and an attempt to explain the game in simpler terms. My observation. You still don't get it, do you? The 4e core books were fine for that style of game play. People who would play it, knew what to do. No, what you should have done is maybe pick up a phone and call Frank Mentzer. Take a look at BECM. Get a clue. No, that doesn't mean present the old rules, but rather, present a streamed down version of current rules in a way similar to the way those four boxed sets did it. It's NOT rocket science people, really. To hear some people talk, this just gets frustrating to me.

I hear can't a lot, and I say nonsense. I hear you'll split the fan base. Really? #1 It's a little late for that, isn't it? #2 If it's Wizards doing both sets, the money goes to the same place. #3 As per the TSR downfall argument, Basic was gone when the stuff hit the fan there, and in its place were tons of boxes of campaign settings for 2e. There's your overkill, and maybe, just maybe a Basic Set would have been a positive. I know it was for over a decade.

But, that aside, 4e got less than four years, including a reboot before this new announcement. 4 years! The new version will "probably" be out in 2013 if I had to guess, so a five year life span that included the reboot. Guys, this has to stop. The game can't keep taking this nonsense. Already I see comments like 6e in six years. Lets gets some stability back. The Monte Cook rehiring strikes me as an atempt to go in that direction. Still hate to see Winter and Baker gone as they are two people who have been there for some time now. It's good to have some people around with a long time perspective, in my opinion.

So, really, I don't want to complain here. There are enough people out there doing that. I want this edition (They seem to be backing off of the 5th edition term in describing what it is) to succeed, and I want all new edition talk to go away for longer than 5 years after this. They will hopefully have the online stuff working well on launch. They will hopefully have a good computer game on the way when the books launch. The books will make more people happy this time, hopefully. I hope they have a good basic version ready this time for beginners AND those of us who like rules lite games (signs point to that as a possibility, but we'll see). Maybe they will explore avenues for marketing this game, such as movies, t.v., cartoons or whatever.

When Gary and Dave put the first game together, the rewrite for AD&D 1e came about due to a need to clarify rules and have a rule set adequate for tournament play. Gary put his phone number in the original book and got all kinds of calls at ALL hours of the night asking for rules clarification. AD&D 1e went all the way to 1989. 2e bumped things up a bit, but didn't rock the boat too much. It lasted another decade. THIS is the kind of stability that is needed. Let people get back to the game and not worrying about new sets of rules being immanent.

Also, I should add I would love to see them work on getting older editions out there for Print on Demand. For one, it's a real olive branch to players of the older games with worn out books, and secondly, it will bring in some extra revenue. Also, a way of getting official new material for those editions should be explored, and these rule sets should be playable on the virtual table. Why not? It's more money and some people would subscribe if their version of the game were supported in that way.

Some of the things I'm reading make me think they are working on something like that. They appear to want to reach out to the older gamers. Newer gamers sometimes cringe at that thought, but why can't they attempt to reach out to all camps? D&D is a big tent, and it's high time that everybody is acknowledged, while the game moves ahead with whatever new ideas are considered good enough to put the logo on it.

So, I don't know where they are going, but I feel it's important that they get this right. They are reaching out to the fans to play test this different version. That is a good step, but it's just one step. I don't envy them their task, because I know it won't be easy. They know the sentiment out there isn't all positive, and they see the negative reaction to 4e pretty well in what Paizo was able to accomplish with Pathfinder. But, dammit, D&D is my game. I've played others, but I want these guys to be successful. I won't support blindly, but I am hoping they pull this off. I'm hoping this will be their biggest success yet. Only time will tell if that turns out to be the case.