|
2 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2011 - 10:09AM
#1
|
|
|
Since 4e started, I've been getting nearly all the books. Have all the Powers on my shelf but Psionic (was on my Xmas list, but no money to snag it for myself yet). I had no interest in the settings books (I like homebrewing) and the ones with premade adventures (see the previous point), but got those books which were mainly monsters (Open Grave, Demonomicon and both Draconomicons). But I clearly remember hearing that the same year PHB III and MM III were to come out, there would also be a DungeonMaster's Guide 3... Was it left on the side of the road to die a silent death in favour of the "Essentials" line (of which I will never purchase a one for myself).
I certainly hope not, since it seems a waste to have spent good money on the "Paragon DMG" and then be denied the Epic one because WOTC changed their business model...
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2011 - 10:16AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Aug 30, 2010
|
Welcome to the gun show.
Yes, Business model and business decisions have changed in the last months.
Take some time and take a look around these boards, you will find the subject to be much covered in all it's forms. Don't look for anything concrete though, all this information is vague and nothing decisive really, we will have to wait and see how it goes.
-Realize You are your own source of all Creation, of your own master plan.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2011 - 2:58PM
#3
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
Since 4e started, I've been getting nearly all the books. Have all the Powers on my shelf but Psionic (was on my Xmas list, but no money to snag it for myself yet). I had no interest in the settings books (I like homebrewing) and the ones with premade adventures (see the previous point), but got those books which were mainly monsters (Open Grave, Demonomicon and both Draconomicons). But I clearly remember hearing that the same year PHB III and MM III were to come out, there would also be a DungeonMaster's Guide 3... Was it left on the side of the road to die a silent death in favour of the "Essentials" line (of which I will never purchase a one for myself).
I certainly hope not, since it seems a waste to have spent good money on the "Paragon DMG" and then be denied the Epic one because WOTC changed their business model...
I believe a developer said it was shelved because it was supoed to have a lot of advice on running epic campaigns and their research indicates very few people are running epic campaigns. My guess is the data they got from the online Character Builder confirmed that research.
Until they think a DMG with an epic concentration would sell, I would not anticipate a DMG3. Also, given that they seem to now not want to have numbered books, for fear of alienating consumers who think they have to have DMG 1 and DMG2 to buy DMG3, even if it comes out, I image they'll call it something new, like Epic Dungeon Mastering.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 06, 2011 - 12:56PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Mar 27, 2004
|
Something like "Epic Level Handbook" or maybe "DM Guide, the Epic Years."
Terms you should know... Spoiler:
Show
Kit Build - A class build that is self sustaining and has mechanical differences than the normal scale. Started in Essentials. Most are call their own terms, though the Base Class should be said in front of their own terms (Like Assassin/Executioner)
Power Points - A mechanic that was wedged into the PHB3 classes (with the exception of the Monk) from the previous editions. This time, they are used to augment At Wills to be Encounters, thus eliminating the need to choose powers past 4th level.
Mage Builds - Kit builds that are schools of magic for the Wizard. A call back to the previous editions powering up of the wizard. (Wizard/Necromancer, for example) Unlike the previous kit builds, Wizards simply lose their Scribe Rituals feature and most likely still can choose powers from any build, unlike the Kit Builds.
Parcel System - A treasure distribution method that keeps adventurers poor while forcing/advising the DM to get wish lists from players. The version 2.0 rolls for treasure instead of making a list, and is incomplete because of the lack of clarity about magic item rarity.
ha ha
Show
They will Essentialize the Essentials classes, otherwise known as Essentials2.
The new sub-sub-classes will be:
* Magician. A subsubclass of Mage, the magician has two implements, wand and hat, one familiar (rabbit) and series of basic tricks.
* Crook. A subsubclass of Thief, the Crook can only use a shiv, which allows him to use his only power... Shank.
* Angry Vicar, a subsubclass of warpriest, the angry vicar has two attacks -- Shame and Lecture.
* Hitter. A subsubclass of Slayer, the Hitter hits things.
* Gatherer. A subsubclass of Hunter, it doesn't actually do anything, but pick up the stuff other players might leave behind.
Future Essentials2 classes include the Security Guard (Sentinel2), the Hexknife (Hexblade2), the Webelos (Scout2), the Gallant (Cavalier2) and the Goofus (Knight2).
These will all be detailed in the box set called Heroes of the Futile Marketing.
(Though what they should really release tomorrow is the Essentialized version of the Witchalok!)
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 06, 2011 - 11:18PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Jul 21, 2010
|
I believe a developer said it was shelved because it was supoed to have a lot of advice on running epic campaigns and their research indicates very few people are running epic campaigns. My guess is the data they got from the online Character Builder confirmed that research.
Until they think a DMG with an epic concentration would sell, I would not anticipate a DMG3. Also, given that they seem to now not want to have numbered books, for fear of alienating consumers who think they have to have DMG 1 and DMG2 to buy DMG3, even if it comes out, I image they'll call it something new, like Epic Dungeon Mastering.
Which CB do you mean? Were they collecting data from CCB? And if they were only collecting data from OCB, the lack of epic characters would make sense, since many people that got that far, might not have wanted to switch of OCB, and for less stable campaign, Essentials became a decent reason to reboot campaign that might not have been that healthy. So a dramatic difference in character levels, tilting towards lower tiers would have been predicatable, but it wouldnt be clear evidence that epic tier campaign weren't being played.
Though it would make sense that less epic tier games are being played, because it wasn't heavily resourced (it needed strong customization), the math was a bit wacky (skill challenges and encounter threat), and for many folks, after 2 sessions per level for 20 levels, it may have ceased being fun (it being the campaign or 4e, or both). I would venture a guess another book, helping DMs maintain the vitality of their campaigns, advice on getting players to epic tier and creating epic tier adventures might have greatly helped the number of epic tier campaigns being played.
So I guess the question I'm interested in is did lack of interest in epic tier games cause the mimimal support epic tier got, or did lack of support decrease interest of playing epic tier campaigns? This isn't really a rhetorical question, or even deeply philosophical one (chicken or the egg).
Here's my theory: The game as released (classic 4e), and the hot fixes through errata, wasn't as well though out as planned, and/or the system wasn't as amenable to the growth strategy (planned product releases) that was originally envisioned. I think the abandonment from the original strategy (1 PH, 1 MM, 1 DMG, 1 World book, and subscription income through DDI) came about through a financial necessity that was caused by, for lack of a better word, greed and over confidence, or at the very least lack of success in forecasting their own business model.
It seems that the intitial release of 4e was successful (based on prolific product development of those early years), and this gave a good reason for Hasbro/WoTC to put out more products to capitalize on the precieved success (this is where the train might have first went off the tracks). My theory is that these products didnt meet their sales expectations and may have even lost money, and that is what cause Hasbro to pull support for the game. DDI could have been a inadvertant casuality in this scenerio. Essentials was a stop gap measure, and the original plan for DnD, that may or may not have been surprisingly succesful was jetisoned and this could be because corporatations need to report quartly earnings. The fact that one product line was sucessful 6 quarters ago doesn't mean a hell of alot if its my dividends check that declining. Future support and investment for that product would be a silly decision for any investor, especially if the earnings forecast has burned me in the past, or the cieling for earnings potential isn't worth the inhereint risk of investment.
If you buy this scenerio, then its possible to conclude that DM3 was killed long before WoTC announced the Essentials Line. It was killed when they first started producing books that lost money. As I look at my shelf and see 5 power books, 2 draconomicons, 3 planes books...it obvious to me, where the train went off the tracks. DM3 was doomed by the success of DM1.
RULE 0 FALLACY
You can also work around some of these problems by invoking the Rule 0 Fallacy ("this rule isn't broken because I can fix it"). In this case, when the system is inappropriately reporting failure or success, the DM should simply ignore it.
But if the mechanics are so broken that we need to frequently ignore them, why are we using them at all?
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 07, 2011 - 1:26AM
#6
|
|
|
So I guess the question I'm interested in is did lack of interest in epic tier games cause the mimimal support epic tier got, or didn't lack of support decrease interest of playing epic tier campaigns?
The classic chicken-and-egg question...
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 07, 2011 - 1:46AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Jul 21, 2010
|
Opps! I edited my original post because i didn't think anyone had read it yet. And yes, we were thinking the exact same thing, and I decided that I wanted the question to go further. Probably to far, but I can't sleep...
RULE 0 FALLACY
You can also work around some of these problems by invoking the Rule 0 Fallacy ("this rule isn't broken because I can fix it"). In this case, when the system is inappropriately reporting failure or success, the DM should simply ignore it.
But if the mechanics are so broken that we need to frequently ignore them, why are we using them at all?
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 07, 2011 - 1:49AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2002
|
Honestly, it's not unreasonable for them to wait awhile to release it. Only so many campaigns have ever actually reached epic at this point. If we're very generous and assume that the average campaign progresses at 3 encounters per week, that's still over a year. Many many many campaigns never get that far, and many others don't progress that quickly. That said, they really should release it eventually, once they've gotten their general direction figured out again.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 07, 2011 - 2:01AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Jul 21, 2010
|
Agreed (with Incenjucar). I'm just suggesting that it might not happen, based on the possible financial reality that I laid out and I hope I'm wrong. I also think that DMG2, even though it was clearly paragon based, wasn't only useful for paragon tiered campaign. I know that personally it really inspired me to keep buying 4e products and grow my game in the hopes that I could keep players interested for long enough to get to paragon. I think that most the really great gaming products generally have useful benefits beyond their stated purpose, and thats what makes them great! Like DMG2. DMG2 is almost good enough to be a recommended buy for almost any table top RPG I've played, or even any video/board/card game designer.
If DMG2 didn't sell well or as well as forecast, it might have been because of the glut of products that came out right around it, and that DMGs would naturally sell less because of their intended audience, after all the average table only has 1 DM and 5 players.
I think a DMG3 more than any other specific product line could do a lot to help resusitate (sp?) DnD. Thats my primary motivation for hammering on this so hard. It's a legacy product line, and it has had a great track record for quality, compared to the others, and I think it may do more for the overall brand than a quarterly earnings sheet would give it credit for.
RULE 0 FALLACY
You can also work around some of these problems by invoking the Rule 0 Fallacy ("this rule isn't broken because I can fix it"). In this case, when the system is inappropriately reporting failure or success, the DM should simply ignore it.
But if the mechanics are so broken that we need to frequently ignore them, why are we using them at all?
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 07, 2011 - 5:51AM
#10
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
Which CB do you mean? Were they collecting data from CCB? And if they were only collecting data from OCB
I meant the OCB, but I didn't say they were only collecting data from it. In fact, the developer's comment that few people were playing epic campaigns was made prior to there even being an OCB. They got that data through basic market research, I presume.
Though it would make sense that less epic tier games are being played, because it wasn't heavily resourced (it needed strong customization)
I think less epic tier campaigns are player because games start at or about level 1, and it can take years of constant play to reach level 21. Lots of campaigns die natural deaths before then and people start new campaigns at lower levels.
So until they have an indication that a significant number of people are playing epic campaigns, I don't think we'll see another DMG.
I love DMG2, but I'm not sure there's a whole lot more to say about DMing in general that makes it worthy fo a hardcover book. The more DMGs you put out, the more niche the advice is going to be.
|
|
|
