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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5690029" data-attributes="member: 82106">You assume anyone set out with the idea of, or knowledge of, someone being certainly displeased. In any case, I think everyone is pretty well advised at this point in history that NO edition roll will be 100% pleasing to everyone. The point I'm making is not that MY preferences should be privileged. It is that IN THIS SITUATION, where there is a whole other game that the displeased people are already playing, that it would be foolish for WotC to think that making an about face and going after those people when they have me and all the other people that like 4e already as customers. History is replete with examples of producers of products thinking that they're going to continue to please audience A AND please some other audience B with a product that is everything to everyone. It almost invariably fails miserably.Now, at some point, when WotC, in the fullness of time, makes a 5e is it reasonable to think that they'll incorporate the lessons learned from 4e in 5e? Of course they would be stupid not to. 5e might well be more pleasing to some fraction of the audience that didn't like 4e, and the way it might do that may be evoking certain things from previous editions. That's different IMO from actually going backwards and creating a 5e that is basically 3.5 warmed over in the hope that it would be a successful strategy. It would also be far different from making a 5e that is yet again entirely different and doesn't build on what was done in 4e at all.So, IMHO, 5e needs to A) build on 4e, and B) not be rushed out before 4e has run its course. This is purely based on my sense of what is likely to succeed, not on my own narrow preferences. Of course we're all biased, so I'm undoubtedly wrong to some greater or lesser degree, but so it goes.</blockquote>

Verification