Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 4535170" data-attributes="member: 2067">I just wanted to say that this line of reasoning is a paragon of practicality. <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&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />In truth, it might have been a better idea to parse out the core by level rather than by variety of content. Anticipation for the Next Tier builds organically, as your characters advance. Given the two-plus-year length of time it takes a reasonably paced party to get through 30 or so levels, they could've milked this all the way up to level 30, and then could have gone back to level 1 and started again!If you were interested in a sustainable edition, this is what I would do. This would be my &quot;product cycle.&quot;I wouldn't have &quot;core rulebooks,&quot; per se. I would instead treat D&amp;D as a game. I would put out the first ten levels, support them, and then put out the next ten levels, and so on, all in one great continuum. Then I would return to the start with a new &quot;game of D&amp;D.&quot; Maybe different flavor, maybe a different setting, definitely a rules update, maybe even a variation on the rules, and, of course, advice for integrating these with the previous books. I would not put out a game you could complete in three books. I would put out a game that continually recycled itself every three - five years (or so). In this continual edition treadmill, you would never be totally complete, but you could easily &quot;take a break,&quot; and be assured that whenever you picked up the game again,&nbsp; you would be close enough to a &quot;new version&quot; to pick it up and chug along. If you found a game you liked, you could stay there forever. Everyone else would be shepherded along at basically the same pace. There would be more options, but each option would be more shallow. If you wanted to add depth to it, well, that's why you have a DM. Really, I probably would have been happier with that than this. Sure, people would complain, but if people are going to complain anyway, you might as well do something amazing with it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 4535170, member: 2067"] I just wanted to say that this line of reasoning is a paragon of practicality. :) In truth, it might have been a better idea to parse out the core by level rather than by variety of content. Anticipation for the Next Tier builds organically, as your characters advance. Given the two-plus-year length of time it takes a reasonably paced party to get through 30 or so levels, they could've milked this all the way up to level 30, and then could have gone back to level 1 and started again! If you were interested in a sustainable edition, this is what I would do. This would be my "product cycle." I wouldn't have "core rulebooks," per se. I would instead treat D&D as a game. I would put out the first ten levels, support them, and then put out the next ten levels, and so on, all in one great continuum. Then I would return to the start with a new "game of D&D." Maybe different flavor, maybe a different setting, definitely a rules update, maybe even a variation on the rules, and, of course, advice for integrating these with the previous books. I would not put out a game you could complete in three books. I would put out a game that continually recycled itself every three - five years (or so). In this continual edition treadmill, you would never be totally complete, but you could easily "take a break," and be assured that whenever you picked up the game again, you would be close enough to a "new version" to pick it up and chug along. If you found a game you liked, you could stay there forever. Everyone else would be shepherded along at basically the same pace. There would be more options, but each option would be more shallow. If you wanted to add depth to it, well, that's why you have a DM. Really, I probably would have been happier with that than this. Sure, people would complain, but if people are going to complain [I]anyway[/I], you might as well do something amazing with it. [/QUOTE]

Verification