Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Wisdom Penalty" data-source="post: 4635854" data-attributes="member: 13287">Bingo - assuming the new players buy the books at a rate equal to or greater than the previous customer base. (In other words, the newbies better have a couple DaveMage types in their group. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> )That's the question on the success of 4e from a business side: Did it, will it, has it attracted enough new gamers to make the loss of a segment of existing players be inconsequential?I don't know.And, for what it's worth, I don't like that marketing decision (if indeed it was one). I think there would have been a way to have your cake and eat it too. For example: (1) remove the accounting issues stemming from overly complex subsystems and (2) retain the core paradigm (Great Wheel, half-orcs, druids, etc.) that had been established. Greatly simplified, I know, but hopefully you get the gist.I see a number of posts from folks who aren't playing 4e - not because of the game - but because it's so different as to make conversion of their homebrew campaigns (from 1e/2e/3e -< 4e) a chore to convert. That's a shame.'Pen</blockquote>