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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jester David" data-source="post: 7674162" data-attributes="member: 37579">It served the same purpose: bring attention back to the game, sell some new lower-cost higher-demand books, and provide a sales spike. Just like 3.5e (which was originally planned as a reprint with errata and minor corrections) and Essentials (which tried to tweak while being completely additive and backwards compatible). However, in all three cases, the fans called it for what it was: a cash grab. It didn't serve the game or fill the needs of the fans or give anyone content that they didn't have before. It existed solely to make the company money. We've seen three very different methods of reprints. There's the art & formatting redux of 2e, there's the heavy rules revision of 3e, and there's the repackaging and refocusing of 4e. None have really extended the life of the game in a meaningful way, especially the 2e and 4e attempts (it's hard to say how much of 3e's continuation was the shot-in-the-arm of 3.5 and how much was people just liking 3e). A rules revision seems the least popular implementation. Not everyone will make the transition so sales will always seem lesser compared to the original. (Sales of 3.0 were 1 1/2 times that of 3.5e) Because it feels mandatory it chafes people. New books work best when people want to buy them not have to buy them. I'm sure lots of gamers decided that 3e was no longer for them - since they'd have to convert everything back to 3.0 - and stopped buying books. And the continued unpopularity of the .5 edition likely hurt Essentials, as people saw it as a similar revision. So the benefits of the mid-edition revision are debatable. In contrast, I like what Paizo did and WotC is currently doing. Where they keep the books in print but incorporate errata into the later printings. I don't need to buy the books - the errata is free on the website - but I gain a benefit if I buy a second copy of the rules. If they continue this with a second or third round of errata, they can have sustained sales of the core rulebooks to returning buyers and newcomers.  That said, when the edition does start to flag, a revision might be preferable to a brand new edition. Especially if the designers are open and explain that. But I certainly hope that's more than 5 years away.</blockquote>

Verification