Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9841675" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Two years is an exaggeration. MAYBE one extra year. The biggest thing that would make a difference is having an actual schedule with internal deadlines, rather than (as you say, something that's happened three editions running) "we dithered and dithered for a year and a half doing 20% of the game, and then had to rush the remaining 80% through the last six months so we didn't miss our publication date".Then perhaps they should (a) actually PLAN for that? If they know a 3-year development cycle isn't enough, perhaps they need to reconsider how they do the planning for a new edition so they don't keep NEEDING to rush things out the door?Wasted time and lack of discipline are a problem to be addressed, most assuredly. They are not an excuse for why we shouldn't bother doing actually rigorous design work.You almost certainly would not though. You "could" accidentally destroy your fanbase permanently with something that got rave reviews but which actual players HATE HATE HATE. "Could" is not a useful metric here.Leaks are gonna happen no matter what. They happened with both 4e and 5e. What makes you think that would be a special problem this time?</blockquote>