Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="prosfilaes" data-source="post: 5847556" data-attributes="member: 40166">That D&D 4 sales are down from previous editions.Any one who hit the North Atlantic was dead of hypothermia. Any one on the Titanic might have survived had a ship got there on time. Many people on Ethiopian Air Flight 961 died because they inflated their life jackets prematurely. Waiting out the current course is frequently a better response then panicking and doing something.The easiest way to get new customers is let your old customers evangelize to them. The hardest way to get new customers is to sell them something they didn't know they needed, worse yet under a name that invokes derision in many of them.Did they try? You've failed to show me that they actually reached out for a new audience. What mainstream magazines did they advertise in? What TV shows did their ads run in?They, like Paizo, made Basic Sets. That was an attempt to reach a new market, but let me note that there was nothing special about 4E in that; Hasbro could have done that if 4E had been Pathfinder.It is a lot harder to be them, but I don't see why we should make it easier by dismissing their responsibility to get it right.No, it's not. You claimed that it was "modern" and said something about a modern 21st century game. There is no meter in the world that you can plug in and measure the modernity of an RPG. There is no objective measurement that can measure that.It's a well-known argument that you can't attract new players with a $75 core set that runs to over 700 pages. That's why both Hasbro and Paizo produced their basic boxes. You're cherry-picking; both the 3.5 and 4 PHBs were 320 pages, and the PF core rulebook is 576 pages, compared to 544 the 4E PHB and DMG (the books it replaced) are. (In any case, it's clear that PF is more complex in some directions then 3.5 was.) Difficulty-wise, 3.5 has a huge advantage that you can hand someone a fighter or rogue and everything after page 168 in the PHB becomes irrelevant; certain characters in 3.5 are much less complex then others, whereas 4E spread the complexity around.In any case, neither word-count nor page-count are great ways of measuring complexity. The question in games generally comes down to the number of viable options a player has at any point and the difficulty of figuring out their long-term consequences. I'd say a level 1 Fighter has more complex and viable options in 4E then in 3.5, so the player of such would perceive 4E as more complex; higher levels and other classes would take more complex analysis. (This is not a claim that overall 4E is more complex then 3.5; I suspect high-level clerics in 3.5 are much more complex, but I don't have the experience to say.) (Note that this, unlike modernity, I regard as tractable by relatively objective means.)</blockquote>

Verification