NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thomas Shey" data-source="post: 8215343" data-attributes="member: 7026617">One of the things I thought but didn't say was "Yeah, 4e Essentials ended up saving the 4e line really well, didn't it?"I mean, sure, as Dave2008 says, every company would like more market.  But the usual problem is "How do you get new players and buyers without losing the ones you have?"  Or alternatively, "Will the new people coming in exceed the old ones going out?"  Until you have evidence this is the case, you have to show how you can make the two pieces of string meet in the middle, and usually people coming in with these questions are, effectively saying "I think people should make the game more like what I want" without asking whether that can be done without making it less like what people already playing it and buying the products want.  Often without realizing some of what they view as flaws other people view as virtues.I mean, almost everyone likes more clarity in their rules.  And as a rule set gets more detailed, this can become more and more of an issue, as it becomes progressively harder to do.  But that does not mean everyone wants simplification, and among those that do, you have to ask the question whether there's other games on the market that would just end up competing for their attention anyway.That was really my point; there's not really signs that Retreater and the people he's talking about would be happy with any PF2e version that also made many of its current fans happy.  So how does his suggestion make any sense for Paizo?</blockquote>

Verification