Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 8663021" data-attributes="member: 22779">Well, fair enough.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />&nbsp; I think it's always a mistake to couch any argument around the idea that the point is representative of anyone other than yourself.&nbsp; ((Note, I'm not directly this at you [USER=467]@Reynard[/USER] - just folks in general) .&nbsp; If you cannot make your point without some sort of appeal to the unseen numbers that you have zero idea if they exist or not, then your point is nowhere near as strong as you think it is.&nbsp; This is why the whole &quot;Well, it's the best selling game, so it shouldn't change&quot; arguments don't work.&nbsp; It became the best selling game BECAUSE it changed.&nbsp; It will remain the best selling game BY changing.&nbsp; Trying to not change is how we wound up with D&amp;D becoming more and more irrelevant in the 90's.&nbsp; It took massively reworking the game to bring it into 3e - making the game completely incompatible with everything that was published previously.&nbsp; It took another massive rework in 5e - making the game completely incompatible with everything that was published previously to make it popular again.Now, hopefully we don't have to go quite that far with the Anniversary edition.&nbsp; I don't think we do.&nbsp; There's still lots of life in the system yet.&nbsp; But, the idea that we should never change the game or adopt new concepts unless we rebrand as an entirely new edition is just a really bad one.&nbsp; We don't stop calling it baseball every time they move the pitcher's mound or change the ball or change the bat or any of the thousand changes they've made to baseball.&nbsp; We don't stop calling it football when we added the instant replay rules, even though that has had immense changes in how the game is played.Why would a relatively minor change that only impacts a handful of monsters possibly require a new edition title?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 8663021, member: 22779"] Well, fair enough. :D I think it's always a mistake to couch any argument around the idea that the point is representative of anyone other than yourself. ((Note, I'm not directly this at you [USER=467]@Reynard[/USER] - just folks in general) . If you cannot make your point without some sort of appeal to the unseen numbers that you have zero idea if they exist or not, then your point is nowhere near as strong as you think it is. This is why the whole "Well, it's the best selling game, so it shouldn't change" arguments don't work. It became the best selling game BECAUSE it changed. It will remain the best selling game BY changing. Trying to not change is how we wound up with D&D becoming more and more irrelevant in the 90's. It took massively reworking the game to bring it into 3e - making the game completely incompatible with everything that was published previously. It took another massive rework in 5e - making the game completely incompatible with everything that was published previously to make it popular again. Now, hopefully we don't have to go quite that far with the Anniversary edition. I don't think we do. There's still lots of life in the system yet. But, the idea that we should never change the game or adopt new concepts unless we rebrand as an entirely new edition is just a really bad one. We don't stop calling it baseball every time they move the pitcher's mound or change the ball or change the bat or any of the thousand changes they've made to baseball. We don't stop calling it football when we added the instant replay rules, even though that has had immense changes in how the game is played. Why would a relatively minor change that only impacts a handful of monsters possibly require a new edition title? [/QUOTE]

Verification