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: 3320707" data-attributes="member: 326">Hi Roman matey! <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=":)" />apologies for the slow reply was really busy on Thursday and then away from the computer most of Friday.Glad to hear it dude! <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=":)" />Fair enough.Still seems like one point to me, and in fairness you didn't give a reason why you disliked minis, cards etc.Not saying you can't be subjective on the matter, but you haven't actually stated whats 'wrong' with cards, minis and so forth.A simplification of the rules to better help and attract new gamers and casual gamers.But I have also said that we would include an Advanced Rulebook for those who want more detail.So you can tailor the level of difficulty to your needs. You can play the game without the minis and board tiles. You can add character sheets if you so wish.Again, the Rulebooks would be short and inoffensive, so I don't really see this as a major issue. They will only comprise a very small fraction of the cost of the boxed set.Every new boxed set would have new feats, new classes/prestige classes, potentially new races, new monsters, new spells and new magic items. So each set has a lot of variety.Okay.I don't see how it could make less money than PnP D&D. You would be opening up to a much wider audience.As for 'tarnishing the brand', the D&D Basic Game nor the D&D Boardgame didn't tarnish it - so why would this*. *Unless again this is a comment on the Dungeons & pirates nomenclature, which I have already said I could wave goodbye to.I think 3.5 has all the bases covered right about now. Therefore continued products are either going to be retreads or ultra specific (and therefore appealing to a smaller percentage of roleplayers). I agree, but what percentage of all 3/3.5 revenue do they bring in I wonder - maybe Ryan Dancey could tell us?I just don't see the incentive in buying a rehash of a book that came out 2-3 years ago. It makes a modicum of sense with the core rulebooks because they are very crunch heavy. But it is a total waste of time for so many other books that I just don't see any reason for it. I think this boils down to the mechanics themselves and the crunch/fluff ratio of the book. It is different from other edition transitions because its too soon to rehash existing books. When they changed from 3 to 3.5 they still had dozens of topics to cover and the initial 3E splatbooks were black and white - so there was half an excuse to make them full colour.Second Edition was basically 1.25 Edition. Which means that 3E was updating rules over 20 years old AND bringing everything into full colour, glossy beauty.The change from 3E's introduction to 3.5E happened so quickly that they didn't have too many products to rehash. But this time around nearly every major release will be a rehash. Well its more a case of wanting the Next Big Thing (which was the name of the initial thread where someone asked me to create a poll...this thread). I simply used 4th Edition in the thread title to get more people to look in (a bit like having Dungeons & Dragons: Pirate Cove, might attract people who like Pirates into buying D&D). <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> In the case of a PnP 4th Ed. I disagree simply because there will be no incentive to buy anything past the core rulebooks.If the 4E rules are as similar to 3.5 as 3.5 was to 3, then that means I can still use 99% of the feats from all the books I have purchased.If the 4E rules are very different (and to be honest I don't see how*, any guesses anyone?)*Armour as Damage Reduction might be one major rule they could go with, but beyond that I think its just going to be a lot of tidying up, streamlining and nit-picking.Well it will be very interesting to see how everything pans out over the next few years. To the untrained eye, yes. But to the gamers who frequent the internet, read Dragon magazine and so forth, they will know different.I think the entire tete-a-tete between Ranger REG and myself was him pushing the genius of gamer geeks over the dumb sports jock - which I assume was a metaphor for the mass market. So if they are that smart they will figure it out - especially if the marketing in gaming press is properly handled.I think it might work in the short term (with the core rulebooks) but is doomed to failure in the long term. I don't see a PnP 4th Edition bringing in new gamers either. Which means that your slice of the market is existing 3.5 gamers minus those who want to stick with 3.5.Its an ever decreasing market base.</blockquote>

Verification