Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 5434550" data-attributes="member: 29398">Problem is, we're already seeing (or at least I am IME) that by-the-book 3e campaigns without a decent DM have all the depth of a Hollywood blonde; and 4e isn't set up any differently as far as I can tell.&nbsp; And once someone's played that sort of system for a while and finds themselves wondering &quot;is that it?&quot;, they're gonna leave...and bang goes the player everyone worked so hard to attract.An average or mediocre DM can take what's given in 1e - or better yet 2e with all those great settings - and just by paying attention to the books can muddle together a campaign that at least has some depth to it, with a world the players want to explore and interact with. (in fact, that pretty much sums up my entire first campaign)&nbsp; Some of those people might even get interested enough to at some point try building a world of their own, and the beat goes on.&nbsp; The newer versions of the game tend to either ignore or gloss over this part.Ease of play brings 'em in, but if the campaigns are shallow they'll get bored mighty quick.&nbsp; Depth and richness is what keeps 'em in.And this is where the business model of the game kinda has to stand on its head: the most successful game to play is probably going to be the least profitable to publish in the long run.&nbsp; In the ideal game system, after the first year's worth of books (representing in this case almost all of the profit you're gonna get) the system/edition should be fully released and in place.&nbsp; After that, all you should need to publish are adventures and very occasional updates as people think of better or newer ideas.&nbsp; Otherwise, turn people loose and let 'em play the game.Lan-&quot;a good DM solves all these problems but such things are hard to find&quot;-efan</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 5434550, member: 29398"] Problem is, we're already seeing (or at least I am IME) that by-the-book 3e campaigns without a decent DM have all the depth of a Hollywood blonde; and 4e isn't set up any differently as far as I can tell. And once someone's played that sort of system for a while and finds themselves wondering "is that it?", they're gonna leave...and bang goes the player everyone worked so hard to attract. An average or mediocre DM can take what's given in 1e - or better yet 2e with all those great settings - and just by paying attention to the books can muddle together a campaign that at least has some depth to it, with a world the players want to explore and interact with. (in fact, that pretty much sums up my entire first campaign) Some of those people might even get interested enough to at some point try building a world of their own, and the beat goes on. The newer versions of the game tend to either ignore or gloss over this part. Ease of play brings 'em in, but if the campaigns are shallow they'll get bored mighty quick. Depth and richness is what keeps 'em in. And this is where the business model of the game kinda has to stand on its head: the most successful game to play is probably going to be the least profitable to publish in the long run. In the ideal game system, after the first year's worth of books (representing in this case almost all of the profit you're gonna get) the system/edition should be fully released and in place. After that, all you should need to publish are adventures and very occasional updates as people think of better or newer ideas. Otherwise, turn people loose and let 'em play the game. Lan-"a good DM solves all these problems but such things are hard to find"-efan [/QUOTE]

Verification