Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Upper_Krust" data-source="post: 3307698" data-attributes="member: 326">Hey crazy_cat! <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=":)" />I have kept the same idea from the start, feel free to show otherwise. Okay and while we are doing that, are you suggesting we also bring out a new pen & paper 4th Edition?But boardgames and (some*) card games are mainstream. Therefore we dress up an RPG in the guise of a boardgame to get it into the mainstream). Targeting certain interests (Pirates, Dinosaurs, Vampires, Robots, Ninjas, Wizards) to appeal to different tastes.*Pokemon and Yu-Gi-Oh?Won't work in my opinion. If you approach the matter half-heartedly it is doomed to failure. If its just seen as a stepping stone to something better then you fall into the same problems which dogged sales of Original D&D after AD&D came out.Personally I would continue supporting 3.5 with occasional products. But I would market this new idea as 'Dungeons & Dragons' for all intents and purposes. Deadly serious. Dora is an explorer, an adventurer if you will. Therefore the idea has merit. Although I just noticed the catalogue already lists a Dora boardgame, so the idea might be too close to an existing product to warrant creation.While someone suggesting Monster Manual VI would no doubt be promoted for their imagination and foresight.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> Yes, although obviously I tried to be as succinct as possible. I half expected a skewed poll for a number of reasons. Firstly, a lot of people fear change.Secondly, there are a number of elitists/purists who simply can't entertain the notion.Thirdly, there are a number of hypocrits who can play an RPG with board/minis, but can't play what I am suggesting, which is exactly the same thing.Fourthly, people have their own preconceptions of a boardgame, and thats probably clouding some opinions. What I am suggest is an RPG with board pieces/minis/cards, but people see the word boardgame and they immediately think HeroQuest or D&D Basic Game.Lastly, its a massive shift from what people are used to, its not just different, its a radically different approach, but I think thats the most logical direction for the game to take.So for someone to vote in agreement with me, they need to first get beyond all the above.I'm happy to address any pertinent points anyone wants to make on the matter.Never said it was broken. But it is daunting to casual gamers and new gamers. It does have far more book-keeping than previous editions and preperation time (for DMs especially) is greatly magnified over previous incarnations of the game.Those are the facts....and how is what I am suggesting any different in that respect.I don't believe you can ignore aspects of 3rd Edition without balance going out the window. You can ignore supplemental books and content, but you can't ignore the fundamentals of the core rulebooks. The game is simply not that modular.Purists can always ignore the board and minis if they so wish. But they are an attractive component that will help shift the game in the mass market.3.5 is all the evidence thats needed. They resold 4 books. Its also a matter of common sense.If 3.5 was all that and a bag of potato chips where is the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting 3.5?Where is the incentive for buying a 4th Edition Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting hardcover if you already have the 3rd Ed. version? There simply isn't any, and thats going to be the case for most books.</blockquote>

Verification