Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5663374" data-attributes="member: 82106">Yeah, I agree, it isn't really possible to say that they did X board game and thus they didn't do Y game supplement. OTOH obviously if they started putting out board game after board game and very few supplements we'd be forced to conclude that the focus had shifted. That might be a result of market forces that the company has little control over too. Of course the fact that RPGs in general are apparently a pretty lively market these days would still lead us to question why WotC wouldn't find it a feasible line of business to focus some effort on.Yeah, I get what you're saying. I'm just not sure there's a lot to be learned about 1e that requires putting out 1e modules or supplements or whatever would constitute real support for that system. I suppose they could find out what the OSR people are most interested in seeing, possibly. The question is wouldn't it be just as easy to do that by going out and buying a copy of OSRIC and a copy of the new GG game and a couple others and playing them and looking at whatever modules there are for them? Honestly I think having Mike and James and whomever spend a week reading back threads from this forum would advance their understanding of what issues people are seeing and what they at least THINK they want far more than any amount of writing material for obsolete versions of the game would. Remember, all those guys are gamers, JUST like us. They all played AD&D back in the day, probably played a 100 other RPGs. Probably see the same issues in their own games that other people have pointed out, etc. Really I think the entire 'issue' is simply that the D&D market at this point consists mostly of people that have been playing for a long time, lots of them are not really interested in a significantly different version of D&D than what they have been playing for years, and WotC has locked itself into an edition cycle of publishing a game that simply IS NOT going to appeal to those people no matter how much they tweak it. I think they can increase the enthusiasm of 4e's current player base by paying close attention to what new things they want and what issues they want addressed, and that increased acceptance may eventually draw in some of the people that aren't now onboard with 4e, and will serve them well with new players, but there's really very little chance it is going to bring the PF and OSR people onboard in large numbers. Eventually it might chip away at those games and as people burn up their nostalgia buzz and PF either grows long in the tooth or gets substantially rewritten itself then 4e might end up on top, except of course that will take so long that 5e will be around by then, or whatever the equivalent of that will be. As to how any of this would apply to such a 5e, well, I can say with certainty that a 'return to the past' won't please many players. It might please a group of players that are now playing PF and gain more than it loses, maybe. Or it could just kill the product entirely. No doubt '5e' can both look a bit more like the old days in some fashion or other and still mostly be pleasing to 4e fans, but that still doesn't mean the PF/OSR people will play it, because it most certainly isn't going to be really close to AD&D mechanically and still make me happy.</blockquote>

Verification