Eh? Data is a plural of anecdotes, the more anecdotes the better then data.
How do you imagine that Data is gathered?
D&D 5E I just don't see why they even bothered with the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide.
Eh? Data is a plural of anecdotes, the more anecdotes the better then data.
How do you imagine that Data is gathered?
Jester David
Hero
Not everyone is lucky enough to have enough disposable income to collect all the major releases for 2-3 game systems. Or have enough free time to regularly play two game systems at the same time. Many people need to pick a game system of choice.
This is especially true when the game system updates. Not everyone will convert to the new edition. They'll stick with the edition they know, that use the books they already own, and play the campaign they're already running.
That, much more than other RPGs currently on the market, divides the fanbase. That's why rapid edition shifts are problematic.
This is especially true when the game system updates. Not everyone will convert to the new edition. They'll stick with the edition they know, that use the books they already own, and play the campaign they're already running.
That, much more than other RPGs currently on the market, divides the fanbase. That's why rapid edition shifts are problematic.
Your claim was that it's splitting the player base because people don't play more than one edition. You have now changed it to people typically don't play more than one edition which is fair enough. However what we don't have is data on how many 2nd edition players came on board for 3.5, 4e, Pathfinser or 5e. We don't know how many 3.0 players came on for 4e or Pathfinder. A lost player returning to a now out of print edition is no more fragmented then if they had remained in the earlier edition. That said, I think we can all agree that rapid edition iterations does result in fragmentation.
Well, they do if one of the game systems is 5e.
Jester David
Hero
Purchasing books? Right now, yeah.
If the much requested increase in books happens... less so. That'll drive people more to choose between games, and will also hasten the end of the edition.
That's still assuming you either have time to play multiple systems and/or are comfortable buying books for a game system you won't play.
I have enough money to get other books, but I'm pretty much done with Pathfinder, barely having used some of the recent releases and being unlikely to play for the next year plus. I just can't justify buying more Pathfinder books when the ones I have are gathering dust.
I can not think of another Hobby that is so economical to get in to then Roleplaying.
I mean, are you not the guy that suggested killing DnD to focus on Magic, which you would have to admit is a much more expensive Hobby then collecting any 2 or 3 Roleplaying games with the added benefit that your cards are guaranteed to become obsolete within a few years.
Jester David
Hero
Again, it's economical in terms of price. $50 every 2-6 months is fairly cheap. There are cheaper hobbies (painting, knitting) and more expensive hobbies (weekly movies, heroin).
It's less economical in terms of time. A good session runs 3-5 hours, and possibly longer. If you're the DM, it can kill the better part of a day.
Having been a Realms fan for as long as I have, I know that these things happen.
The frustration that rises along with each discovery of an error (or seeming error) is something I understand. I also know that it is far too easy to assume an error--it cuts out the opportunity to think about why something is presented the way it was.
I view the act of being frustrated as a choice. For me, dwelling on it is a waste of time. I like to voice my frustrations and move on.
I know from experience that it's the little inconsistencies that drive chatter about the Realms. Errors differentiate Realms books, too, which keeps them from feeling so repetitive.
Anyway, when I look at the map in the SCAG, I treat anything on it that resides well to the east of the Sword Coast as less reliable.
I wouldn't automatically assume city icons were omitted by mistake, either.
pukunui
Legend
Yeah, that thought occurred to me. I initially thought they were a mistake when I saw them on Mike's full-size map - and he regarded them as a mistake and got them fixed as well (along with the mistakenly placed Marsember) - but then when I saw they were present on the map in the book, I wondered if maybe it was done on purpose. It's possible that they left the icons off those cities that aren't talked about in the book since they're technically not part of the Sword Coast.
Still, it's nice to have the icons present for all the cities on the full-size map, since it covers more ground than just the Sword Coast.
BryonD
Hero
If someone likes two games and one produces new content and the other doesn't, the lack of new content will be a big driver for the majority of people to choose the other game.
If they BOTH produce content then the one that produce BETTER content will be the driver.
If NEITHER produce content, it doesn't matter because nothing is selling.
Pathfinder has been going a long time.
I love Pathfinder.
I buy practically nothing new for PF because there is so much already out. The new stuff has become marginalized, and often not very great quality.
You could say this makes your point. But if you think 5E won't be fading into the sunset six years from now, you are dreaming.
Edition turnover is always going to be a fact of life from a market perspective. So looking at PF at this stage of it's existence is not realistic standard.
Similar Threads
