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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="(Psi)SeveredHead" data-source="post: 6221592" data-attributes="member: 1165">More modern rules are not automatically better, but it's a learning process. You learn more about your customers. You learn what didn't work.On this I agree. I used to play 2e before 3e came out. The new rules made more sense. I was especially pleased with ability scores, a sensible point buy system (Alternity didn't work, as the point buy wasn't weighed), classes that didn't have different XP tracks, and so forth.Of course, every time you implement a rules change, someone will say "you changed it, now it sucks". Do that enough and you get an entirely different fanbase.Instead of applying broad brushes, you should ask what about the old ruleset is outdated. I don't think there's a specific time period that's listed as "outdated".Have you taken a look at Palladium? That's a game that hasn't been updated in a really long time, and it shows. (I'm not counting splatbooks. There's been no change to the core rules for two decades.)Does anyone call Go or Chess outdated? Monopoly might be outdated though.I've not played those rulesets, only 2e, so I can't competently debate that with you. Of course, if you don't think that's outdated, you can continue to play it. WotC is releasing a bunch of older D&D material, a big deal for those who want to legally acquire material and can't find it in FLGSs anymore.What specific innovations? It seems you didn't see those innovations as positive. I don't believe people are automatically latching onto newer systems as better, they are evaluating it for themselves. If anything, the fragmentation of the fanbase suggests that people do not automatically see the newer games as "better".Nobody really thinks that way.I think the majority of gamers in general, not just on ENWorld, like the newer systems because there's parts of the newer systems that are better for them.Thing is, older gamers who love those old board games already own them. It's rather difficult to sell a copy of Monopoly to someone who already has it.Maybe chess isn't that popular. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f641.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":(" title="Frown    :("  data-smilie="3"data-shortname=":(" /> While chess is technically a board game, I see a vast gulf between it and Monopoly or other such games. I don't think they're attracting the same customers. (Also, it's hard to sell chess. It's available online, in a format that lets you play a computer or someone else online. I'm sure you could play Monopoly online too, but who would want to?)The only big change in Warhammer Fantasy that I'm familiar with is Fantasy 2e going to 3e. I had issues with 2e (specifically rolled everything). 3e fixed that... but it was so completely different it was basically a new game.With the exception of talk of Palladium, I have never heard anyone talk like that.You won't get a psychologist to tell you that, because it's not true.I could go into a lengthy explanation, but that could spark an edition war. Also, I don't know B/X, so my examples (based on 2e) wouldn't make sense to you. If you don't know 4e, the examples would make even less sense to you.</blockquote>

Verification