Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TheAuldGrump" data-source="post: 5764608" data-attributes="member: 6957">The main problem, as far as I am concerned, is the acquisition of new players. If the split hurts this then the split is bad. If the split helps with this then it is good.I think that it is bad, but I could be wrong.WotC had a chance at this for Essentials, but it looks like it died aborning. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f641.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":(" title="Frown    :("  data-smilie="3"data-shortname=":(" /> It is why I have hopes that 5e might be along the lines of BECMI - we need the new blood.Pathfinder struck closer to the mark with the PBB, but I don't know how well that is working. The Borders that we used to have was actively pushing gaming, I even ran a few games for newbies at their manager's request. (And a game for the manager and his crew.)The B*A*M that replaced Borders doesn't seem to care. Half the shelf space, shared with computer game books, back corner location, uninformed staff - but they have five full shelves of Bibles, Bible covers, and books on Christian Living.... A bit of market research would have done them some good - instead they are complaining that sales are down 75% from the Borders that used to have the location.... We had one of the most successful Borders in the nation.The Auld Grump</blockquote>