Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="billd91" data-source="post: 5833352" data-attributes="member: 3400">I think I can, in no small part, argue away from the first two points because neither really is correct. 1) 3e didn't drop into a period of being fallow for 10 years. TSR was cranking lots of products into the mid 1990s and WotC, after acquiring TSR in 1997, put out a lot of product that was already in the pipeline. Plus we do have evidence of declining market share thanks to ICv2's surveys. They may not take into account online bookstore sales nor Pathfinder's direct subscriptions, but they do indicate a relative decline in the hobby market and distributors who serve them. And that's still an important market segment.2) 3e wasn't introduced in a booming recovery since the worst of the recession at that time hit the US between 2002 and 2003. That was after the introduction of 3e, which happened right around the time the dotcom bubble burst.As far as 4e's rejection being primarily because of the attempt at balancing the classes within the same structure? If that weren't one factor (yes, potentially out of many), why would people keep bringing it up? It's one of the most contentious issues we see on these boards. I'm reasonably confident it's a factor in 4e's troubles.</blockquote>