My take: I have less faith in WotC's ability to stand by a product, try to improve it, and to try to nurture the fanbase. For better or worse, they have given up, pulled products from the queue, and said "we're cutting our losses with this piece of junk (4e)."
Admin here. Hey, it's fine to offer your opinion but please avoid edition war-ry language. "Piece of junk" sounds like it's designed to make people angry and start arguments, and that's not something we want to put up with. Thanks. PM me with any questions. -- Piratecat
They are listening to other companies' customers (chief among them Paizo) more than their own (those who currently play 4e). If this trend continues, who's to say that they won't change 5e again to appeal to Goodman Games' customers or those from other hobby games (Warhammer)?
From what I've read, the design goal is to take the game back to pre-3.x. I've already got those books, and retroclones exist that are cheaper.
Between Pathfinder, retroclones, and this debacle, I think I've finally realized that I don't need WotC to play D&D.
Retreater
Admin here. Hey, it's fine to offer your opinion but please avoid edition war-ry language. "Piece of junk" sounds like it's designed to make people angry and start arguments, and that's not something we want to put up with. Thanks. PM me with any questions. -- Piratecat
They are listening to other companies' customers (chief among them Paizo) more than their own (those who currently play 4e). If this trend continues, who's to say that they won't change 5e again to appeal to Goodman Games' customers or those from other hobby games (Warhammer)?
From what I've read, the design goal is to take the game back to pre-3.x. I've already got those books, and retroclones exist that are cheaper.
Between Pathfinder, retroclones, and this debacle, I think I've finally realized that I don't need WotC to play D&D.
Retreater
Last edited by a moderator: