Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 5476117" data-attributes="member: 957">Well before PF was announced, I was already helping Wulf Ratbane work on &quot;3.75&quot; (which eventually became &quot;Trailblazer&quot; AFTER PF was announced, for fairly obvious reasons).I actually had also bought some new GURPS and Warhammer stuff, just looking around at options. 4E was off the table.&nbsp; And, as much as I LOVE to argue about it, I've also quite truthfully stated on numerous occasions that I consider 4E to be a perfectly &quot;ok&quot; game.&nbsp; The most common reaction I hear from people I talk to is &quot;4E sucks&quot;.&nbsp; I am &quot;hostile&quot; to certain comparisons that get made between 4E and 3E.&nbsp; But I'm just &quot;meh&quot; on the game itself.&nbsp; And yet, long before PF came along, I knew I was not going to be playing 4E.&nbsp; I don't think people who are more hostile to the game itself are any more likely than I to &quot;give in&quot;.People are not choosing 3E over 4E because Paizo made Pathfinder.Paizo made Pathfinder because it became very clear that people wanted to choose 3E over 4E.Yes, there were a lot of other reasons as well.&nbsp; But this specific variable is the question at hand. Also, as has been pointed out, a significant number of 3E holdouts don't really care for Pathfinder.&nbsp; If the fact that Paizo is supporting the old edition was the only thing keeping people from giving in, those people would all be picking dailies by now.Far and away the number one reason people are not playing 4E is, quite simply, they don't want to.&nbsp; Anything else is just a kind of wishful thinking.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BryonD, post: 5476117, member: 957"] Well before PF was announced, I was already helping Wulf Ratbane work on "3.75" (which eventually became "Trailblazer" AFTER PF was announced, for fairly obvious reasons). I actually had also bought some new GURPS and Warhammer stuff, just looking around at options. 4E was off the table. And, as much as I LOVE to argue about it, I've also quite truthfully stated on numerous occasions that I consider 4E to be a perfectly "ok" game. The most common reaction I hear from people I talk to is "4E sucks". I am "hostile" to certain comparisons that get made between 4E and 3E. But I'm just "meh" on the game itself. And yet, long before PF came along, I knew I was not going to be playing 4E. I don't think people who are more hostile to the game itself are any more likely than I to "give in". People are not choosing 3E over 4E because Paizo made Pathfinder. Paizo made Pathfinder because it became very clear that people wanted to choose 3E over 4E. Yes, there were a lot of other reasons as well. But this specific variable is the question at hand. Also, as has been pointed out, a significant number of 3E holdouts don't really care for Pathfinder. If the fact that Paizo is supporting the old edition was the only thing keeping people from giving in, those people would all be picking dailies by now. Far and away the number one reason people are not playing 4E is, quite simply, they don't want to. Anything else is just a kind of wishful thinking. [/QUOTE]

Verification