Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
The Myth of the Bo9S's Popularity
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Felix" data-source="post: 3973753" data-attributes="member: 3929"><p>Ayup.</p><p></p><p>Check. Your. Sources.</p><p></p><p>Regardless of what standard of "popularity" you're using for the Book of 9 Swords, and regardless of the truth value of if it was "popular" or not, there is no incentive for WotC to call the book anything but "popular".</p><p></p><p>As I was reading this thread I thought to myself, "Self, I remember thumbing through the book and being underwhelmed and uninterested by it. I also remember lots of buzz on the boards about particulars that folks didn't like, and agreeing with them. But in this thread WotC said it was popular, and it seems they'll be basing 4e on some of its ideas and mechanics, so maybe I was wrong about the Book of 9 Swords."</p><p></p><p>I had this thought as a person who doesn't expect to buy 4e, and who wasn't enamored by the Bo9S. I'm not saying that somewhere there creeps a marketing exec giggling and twirling his mustache because he's doing this on purpose; I'm just saying that if WotC is trying to shake things up a bit and revive the game's popularity by offering a different game with shiny new mechanics, then "popular" is one of the words I'd use as a marketer to describe the beta testing. It suggests that while the new game is different, some of the fundaments were well received by folks who loved the game that you, yes <em>you</em>, loved: and you'll love it too!</p><p></p><p>So there's no reason to call the book anything but popular. It follows the adage: When In Doubt, Declare Success!</p><p></p><p>A response to this, of course, would be that there is little incentive for WotC to base a new edition on something unpopular. If WotC wanted to stay with the same old formula for D&D, you'd be right. But something tells me that WotC is taking a risk here: something tells me they're not basing a new edition on something that was popular, but rather basing it on something that <em>will be</em> popular, even if it grew from something that wasn't. The relationship between roses and compost heaps comes to mind. </p><p></p><p>So whatever the Bo9S was, WotC thinks (hopes? prays?) 4e will be popular. Maybe it was a popular book. Maybe it's a marketer's gimmick. Maybe because 4e *will be popular*, a previous expression of its game design philosophy <em>should also</em> have been popular: and so it necessarily was. </p><p></p><p>*shrug*</p><p></p><p>Meh. I wouldn't put too much store in WotC calling one of its products "popular"; coming from their lips the word is meaningless.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Felix, post: 3973753, member: 3929"] Ayup. Check. Your. Sources. Regardless of what standard of "popularity" you're using for the Book of 9 Swords, and regardless of the truth value of if it was "popular" or not, there is no incentive for WotC to call the book anything but "popular". As I was reading this thread I thought to myself, "Self, I remember thumbing through the book and being underwhelmed and uninterested by it. I also remember lots of buzz on the boards about particulars that folks didn't like, and agreeing with them. But in this thread WotC said it was popular, and it seems they'll be basing 4e on some of its ideas and mechanics, so maybe I was wrong about the Book of 9 Swords." I had this thought as a person who doesn't expect to buy 4e, and who wasn't enamored by the Bo9S. I'm not saying that somewhere there creeps a marketing exec giggling and twirling his mustache because he's doing this on purpose; I'm just saying that if WotC is trying to shake things up a bit and revive the game's popularity by offering a different game with shiny new mechanics, then "popular" is one of the words I'd use as a marketer to describe the beta testing. It suggests that while the new game is different, some of the fundaments were well received by folks who loved the game that you, yes [i]you[/i], loved: and you'll love it too! So there's no reason to call the book anything but popular. It follows the adage: When In Doubt, Declare Success! A response to this, of course, would be that there is little incentive for WotC to base a new edition on something unpopular. If WotC wanted to stay with the same old formula for D&D, you'd be right. But something tells me that WotC is taking a risk here: something tells me they're not basing a new edition on something that was popular, but rather basing it on something that [i]will be[/i] popular, even if it grew from something that wasn't. The relationship between roses and compost heaps comes to mind. So whatever the Bo9S was, WotC thinks (hopes? prays?) 4e will be popular. Maybe it was a popular book. Maybe it's a marketer's gimmick. Maybe because 4e *will be popular*, a previous expression of its game design philosophy [i]should also[/i] have been popular: and so it necessarily was. *shrug* Meh. I wouldn't put too much store in WotC calling one of its products "popular"; coming from their lips the word is meaningless. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
The Myth of the Bo9S's Popularity
Top