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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 4525067" data-attributes="member: 7635">They lost people at 3e, they lost people at 2e, and they lost Dialgo back in 1975. One need only look around the 1e/2e/OD&D tagged threads to see the truth.Fourth edition has truly divided the community in ways both foreseen and unforeseen. While we knew there would be hold-outs (those that would descend into grogonard status along with 3e as the market dwindled) no one foresaw Pathfinder, the Retro-clones, and a sudden resurgence of pre-2000 edition D&D. The community, which remained mostly 3e-based (with occasional earlier edition hold-outs fluttering in) broke seven-ways to Sunday. Everyone, it seemed, had an opinion of what Fourth Edition should have looked like, and it seems that Real 4e didn't satisfy a lot of them. The dissatisfaction of many (be it because of mechanics, fluff, or presentation) left a large whole that a lot of other games sought to fill. Some attempted alternate evolutions of 3e (Pathfinder) or 2e/1e (C&C), while others sought to recapture or re concept former glories (retro clones and actual retro games). While the 1e/2e -> 3e was no cakewalk, the market didn't splinter. It broke exactly as predicted; some stayed in older editions, some upgraded, and some stopped playing. OGL though, for all its wonders, brought D&D the ability to splinter off into so many factions of people believing their version is the most legitimate. (In that regard, OGL was D&D's own worst enemy; it created its own competition). You can blame it on any number of things, but 4e failed to galvanize the community like 3e did (at least in the beginning).</blockquote>

Verification