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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5765457" data-attributes="member: 22779">This certainly worked for OSRIC.Is that 250k statement something you know or a possible situation?  You've made it a statement here, but, I'm wondering if you left out the "if" at the beginning.Really, I'm not sure if 250k would ever have been reasonable.  I mean, it would be great if it happened, but, I'm thinking that sub numbers in that range would be pretty pie in the sky.However, a split only makes this number impossible if you believe that the gamer base is static - that it isn't growing.Personally, I think the increased exposure from both sides, appealing to two very different crowds, is a good thing.  I don't want a 3.5 or Pathfinder game.  It's not to my taste.  I want a 4e game because it appeals to me.  A nominal 5e that tries to bring you back will lose me because my tastes are not your tastes.3e D&D had lost me a long time ago really.  I kept playing because of the modules, but, even then, I got out of D&D for a couple of years even before going to 4e because I was dissatisfied with 3e.  4e has really energized my D&D gaming again.  I've actually created my own adventures for the first time in years.So, yes, I do believe the split is a very good thing.  It has given the players the best of both worlds.  Those that want a 3.5 D&D style game have Pathfinder.  Those that are OSR have an embarrassment of riches for choice.  And, yes, 4e players have lots of goodies too.I think that instead of a period of slow dying that some are pointing to, we are entering a period of sustainable growth where everyone's tastes get catered to.</blockquote>

Verification