Its been my experience with comparing products that have 2 camps, that a logical comparison doesn't really work with either camp.
Barring some horrible situation where a camp is passionate about a truly horrible product that nobody in their right mind ever uses for the job, most of these camps form around products that BOTH have been used successfully for virtually the same situation.
Frex: Windows vs. Linux. For every business running on Windows, you can find the same business running on Linux. And each will cite pro's and con's that support their position. Yet somehow, their competitor has not been horribly impeded by the supposed con's.
I've been involved with projects, involving Linux people and Windows people and getting the new system to work always involves the "we want our platform!" comparison argument.
You've got the same thing, except it's 3e vs 4e.
The problem always gets pushed to management. That's You. The GM.
Management's criteria is always:
what are we already using?
what have we already got a majority stake in?
What do my golfing buddies use?
At best, the decision will be based on, what do we have the most existing systems in place on. For business, this means do we have more Linux servers than Windows? For Gaming, it means, what books do you already own and what's the majority headcount of people who know it?
At worst, the manager will look at what the rest of the industry is using or claims is the best, and choose that.
For the purposes of solving the actual problem (running Facebook.com or playing an RPG), it doesn't really matter. Pick one and you can solve the problem. You might do some workarounds, but it turns out EVERY product is not a perfect fit for your unique situation.
For the OP, it's all about being nice and diplomatic. When you do make your choice, do NOT go into any comparison reasons. That's just the arguing phase again, and the losing side will just side contradictions to it.
Your business reason for you decision should be:
what books do you already own and are familiar with as GM?
You announce your decision as "Regardless, of what product I choose, I would like all of you to put aside your concerns and join my game so we can all have a good time together. As friends, it is more important that we can do a common activity, than the exact details of that activity. I have chosen ProductX because it is what I am comfortable in running to deliver a solid experience to my players. Please let me know if you willl be able to participate."
Note that you don't announce the version first. You appeal to their sense of group, not their sense of favorite product.
Unless you are trying to GM 2e in a community of not-2e players, as GM you hold the keys to the game. Anybody who does not get on board, loses out. Don't be a jerk about it, but the GM has to hold the final decision, because he's the guy doing the work. And his decision should be based on what he can run well, not what the players claim they want.
Barring some horrible situation where a camp is passionate about a truly horrible product that nobody in their right mind ever uses for the job, most of these camps form around products that BOTH have been used successfully for virtually the same situation.
Frex: Windows vs. Linux. For every business running on Windows, you can find the same business running on Linux. And each will cite pro's and con's that support their position. Yet somehow, their competitor has not been horribly impeded by the supposed con's.
I've been involved with projects, involving Linux people and Windows people and getting the new system to work always involves the "we want our platform!" comparison argument.
You've got the same thing, except it's 3e vs 4e.
The problem always gets pushed to management. That's You. The GM.
Management's criteria is always:
what are we already using?
what have we already got a majority stake in?
What do my golfing buddies use?
At best, the decision will be based on, what do we have the most existing systems in place on. For business, this means do we have more Linux servers than Windows? For Gaming, it means, what books do you already own and what's the majority headcount of people who know it?
At worst, the manager will look at what the rest of the industry is using or claims is the best, and choose that.
For the purposes of solving the actual problem (running Facebook.com or playing an RPG), it doesn't really matter. Pick one and you can solve the problem. You might do some workarounds, but it turns out EVERY product is not a perfect fit for your unique situation.
For the OP, it's all about being nice and diplomatic. When you do make your choice, do NOT go into any comparison reasons. That's just the arguing phase again, and the losing side will just side contradictions to it.
Your business reason for you decision should be:
what books do you already own and are familiar with as GM?
You announce your decision as "Regardless, of what product I choose, I would like all of you to put aside your concerns and join my game so we can all have a good time together. As friends, it is more important that we can do a common activity, than the exact details of that activity. I have chosen ProductX because it is what I am comfortable in running to deliver a solid experience to my players. Please let me know if you willl be able to participate."
Note that you don't announce the version first. You appeal to their sense of group, not their sense of favorite product.
Unless you are trying to GM 2e in a community of not-2e players, as GM you hold the keys to the game. Anybody who does not get on board, loses out. Don't be a jerk about it, but the GM has to hold the final decision, because he's the guy doing the work. And his decision should be based on what he can run well, not what the players claim they want.
