Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lizard" data-source="post: 4311509" data-attributes="member: 1054">Well, for starters, I wouldn't have focused on the negatives of 3e, but the positives of 4e. Let the players decide for themselves why 4e was &quot;better&quot;, instead of beating them over the head with &quot;3e sucks!&quot;I'd have handed out copies of the in-design game to trusted third party developers -- free -- as of September '07. I'd encourage them to discuss things which excited them and the products they hoped to make. I'd make sure the current 3e gamers would be excited not just about 4e, but about all the Cool <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> which would be coming out along with 4e -- stuff that they could only use if they &quot;upgraded&quot;.I'd have focused previews on crunch, not fluff, especially things with no equivalent in 3e, like skill challenges.I'd have a series called &quot;Evolution of a rule&quot;, which would take a single mechanic -- say, dying -- and show the iterations it went through and why it was changed into its final form.I wouldn't have basically killed Dragon and Dungeon.I would have had a regular series of &quot;Getting ready for 4e&quot;, on incorporating 4e-ish mechanics in 3e, as much as possible. In short, I would have focused on &quot;transition and upgrade&quot;, not &quot;The old system SUCKED! The new one ROCKS!&quot; simplicity. I would have embraced the existing audience instead of alienating them.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lizard, post: 4311509, member: 1054"] Well, for starters, I wouldn't have focused on the negatives of 3e, but the positives of 4e. Let the players decide for themselves why 4e was "better", instead of beating them over the head with "3e sucks!" I'd have handed out copies of the in-design game to trusted third party developers -- free -- as of September '07. I'd encourage them to discuss things which excited them and the products they hoped to make. I'd make sure the current 3e gamers would be excited not just about 4e, but about all the Cool :):):):) which would be coming out along with 4e -- stuff that they could only use if they "upgraded". I'd have focused previews on crunch, not fluff, especially things with no equivalent in 3e, like skill challenges. I'd have a series called "Evolution of a rule", which would take a single mechanic -- say, dying -- and show the iterations it went through and why it was changed into its final form. I wouldn't have basically killed Dragon and Dungeon. I would have had a regular series of "Getting ready for 4e", on incorporating 4e-ish mechanics in 3e, as much as possible. In short, I would have focused on "transition and upgrade", not "The old system SUCKED! The new one ROCKS!" simplicity. I would have embraced the existing audience instead of alienating them. [/QUOTE]

Verification