Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Cadfan" data-source="post: 4091696" data-attributes="member: 40961">I've found it interesting to watch the commentary of various 3rd party developers and free lancers.&nbsp; Contrary the comments someone made above, 3rd party publishes have the LEAST reason to be honest about their negative views, if they have them.The smartest ones (in my opinion) are the ones saying something along the lines of &quot;I loved 3e, and I think there was limitless room for fun in it.&nbsp; Maybe I'll continue to write 3e products if the demand is there, or if it strikes my fancy.&nbsp; But I'm really looking forwards to the future and to digging in to 4e.&nbsp; It looks like it will be really great.&quot;&nbsp; This is smart because it makes a conciliatory gesture to rage filled fans of 3e, while making the developer a part of the 4e fan club, so to speak.&nbsp; Now the developer can sell to both groups.The next smartest are the ones saying things like, &quot;I really like 4e, except for issue X.&nbsp; But I bet that could be fixed with a rule like Y, or maybe Z.&quot;&nbsp; This is smart because it doesn't burn bridges with 4e, establishes a connection with others who have similar concerns with issue X, and best of all, positions the developer as a can-do kind of guy who will in the future write good products that take the positive things about 4e and merge them with whatever it is that people concerned about X wish 4e had.&nbsp; Rule Y and Z become a sort of preview for future work by that writer.After that comes the Paizo types you mention.&nbsp; They raise concerns about X, and also Y, and also Z, but provide no solutions, and make vague comments about 4e not being good at telling the right kinds of stories.&nbsp; This garners them appeal with the ragers, but does burn a few bridges- if a writer thinks that 4e doesn't do a good job of telling the right kind of stories, doesn't that bring suspicion on later projects that tell exactly that kind of story?&nbsp; If I think that I can tell a certain type of story with 4e, but a writer thinks it can't be easily done, doesn't that suggest that my work is about as good as the writers?&nbsp; When facing a change in your industry, you generally do not want to position yourself as fearful.&nbsp; These people should instead be saying something along the lines of &quot;3e and 4e look to be good in different ways, and we look forwards to supporting both.&quot;The worst are the developers and freelancers who say things like &quot;I hate X, Y, and Z about 4e, and I'm sure that 4e will be bad for running games of the sort I like to run.&quot;&nbsp; This is basically a big, bold print warning to the rest of us: &quot;DON'T BUY 4E PRODUCTS FROM THIS GUY!&nbsp; HE'S TELLING YOU IN ADVANCE TO EXPECT HIS FUTURE WORK TO SUCK!&quot;&nbsp; There are only a few people doing this.&nbsp; They really should stop, for the sake of their own careers.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Cadfan, post: 4091696, member: 40961"] I've found it interesting to watch the commentary of various 3rd party developers and free lancers. Contrary the comments someone made above, 3rd party publishes have the LEAST reason to be honest about their negative views, if they have them. The smartest ones (in my opinion) are the ones saying something along the lines of "I loved 3e, and I think there was limitless room for fun in it. Maybe I'll continue to write 3e products if the demand is there, or if it strikes my fancy. But I'm really looking forwards to the future and to digging in to 4e. It looks like it will be really great." This is smart because it makes a conciliatory gesture to rage filled fans of 3e, while making the developer a part of the 4e fan club, so to speak. Now the developer can sell to both groups. The next smartest are the ones saying things like, "I really like 4e, except for issue X. But I bet that could be fixed with a rule like Y, or maybe Z." This is smart because it doesn't burn bridges with 4e, establishes a connection with others who have similar concerns with issue X, and best of all, positions the developer as a can-do kind of guy who will in the future write good products that take the positive things about 4e and merge them with whatever it is that people concerned about X wish 4e had. Rule Y and Z become a sort of preview for future work by that writer. After that comes the Paizo types you mention. They raise concerns about X, and also Y, and also Z, but provide no solutions, and make vague comments about 4e not being good at telling the right kinds of stories. This garners them appeal with the ragers, but does burn a few bridges- if a writer thinks that 4e doesn't do a good job of telling the right kind of stories, doesn't that bring suspicion on later projects that tell exactly that kind of story? If I think that I can tell a certain type of story with 4e, but a writer thinks it can't be easily done, doesn't that suggest that my work is about as good as the writers? When facing a change in your industry, you generally do not want to position yourself as fearful. These people should instead be saying something along the lines of "3e and 4e look to be good in different ways, and we look forwards to supporting both." The worst are the developers and freelancers who say things like "I hate X, Y, and Z about 4e, and I'm sure that 4e will be bad for running games of the sort I like to run." This is basically a big, bold print warning to the rest of us: "DON'T BUY 4E PRODUCTS FROM THIS GUY! HE'S TELLING YOU IN ADVANCE TO EXPECT HIS FUTURE WORK TO SUCK!" There are only a few people doing this. They really should stop, for the sake of their own careers. [/QUOTE]

Verification