Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 5917331" data-attributes="member: 22424">The thing is, if WotC want my money, then it's not enough for them to produce a good game, or even a great D&amp;D. What they need to create is a game that is a better fit for me than either my current edition of choice (3.5e) and whatever I can put together myself, and it needs to be &quot;better enough&quot; to compel me to switch, despite the cost and hassle of doing so.(That &quot;better enough&quot; test is why I don't play Pathfinder, FWIW.)That's a pretty tall order. What's more, it's not enough for WotC to convince me to switch. What they need to do is convince a very large number of people that their new D&amp;D is &quot;better enough&quot; than what they currently have, or 5e fails.Now, there are some things that, if WotC choose to do them, it all-but-guarantees that I won't be interested in 5e. If, for example, they produce another 1,000 page monstrosity of core rules (okay, okay, 960 and 832 pages), with the assumption that we'll buy into another 1,000+ pages of supplements to make the game 'complete', then there's virtually no chance I'll be interested - such a game just won't be able to pass the &quot;better enough&quot; test.Other people, not unsurprisingly, each have their own set of preferences and deal-breakers. Of these, some are actually serious issues, while others are simply hyperbole. But what I don't get is why people shouldn't express their preferences?Uh-huh. Well, thanks - you've certainly convinced me!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="delericho, post: 5917331, member: 22424"] The thing is, if WotC want my money, then it's not enough for them to produce a good game, or even a [i]great[/i] D&D. What they need to create is a game that is a better fit for me than either my current edition of choice (3.5e) and whatever I can put together myself, [i]and[/i] it needs to be "better enough" to compel me to switch, despite the cost and hassle of doing so. (That "better enough" test is why I don't play Pathfinder, FWIW.) That's a pretty tall order. What's more, it's not enough for WotC to convince [i]me[/i] to switch. What they need to do is convince a very large number of people that their new D&D is "better enough" than what they currently have, or 5e fails. Now, there are some things that, if WotC choose to do them, it all-but-guarantees that I won't be interested in 5e. If, for example, they produce [i]another[/i] 1,000 page monstrosity of core rules (okay, okay, 960 and 832 pages), with the assumption that we'll buy into another 1,000+ pages of supplements to make the game 'complete', then there's virtually no chance I'll be interested - such a game just won't be able to pass the "better enough" test. Other people, not unsurprisingly, each have their own set of preferences and deal-breakers. Of these, some are actually serious issues, while others are simply hyperbole. But what I don't get is why people shouldn't express their preferences? Uh-huh. Well, thanks - you've certainly convinced me! [/QUOTE]

Verification