Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nikchick" data-source="post: 2764288" data-attributes="member: 344">You're right that Pramas has been critical of 3.5, but he's NEVER been critical of the quality of the changes or of WotC's right to make them. The implementation and release of 3.5 was poorly timed and mishandled and had an adverse effect on D20 across the board. It was promoted as a revision but in practice it was a series of hundreds and hundreds of small changes that meant players and D20-producers alike had to face remastering the game from the ground up.  None of that is a position against the release of new editions or the rights of publishers to do them. The time period between First and Second edition Mutants & Masterminds was about three years, which is very standard for this industry. Fans and players of first edition M&M exposed what we felt to be design flaws that we felt we could improve upon. looking to the long temr, it would be foolish to continue to support and entrench those flaws when we had the opportunity to correct them and produce an even better game going forward. We contacted M&M Superlink publishers during the process and brought them on board before the release of the new edition; they were offered advanced access to the new rules, I believe some were even involved as voluntary playtesters and advisors.  Many of the people using Mutants & Masterminds as the basis of their own designs are PDF publishers who can much more easily revise their products without having to worry about obsolete stock (compared to print publishers who have to consider the implications of having thousands of copies of a printed book that is no longer compatible). I don't think the two scenarios are really very comparable at all.</blockquote>

Verification