So let's meet your specific arguments one at a time, shall we?
The "Paizo Route".
The catch with incremental changes is similar to the problems with the 4e Updates.
First, because you can make changes, there's less pressure to get it right the first time.
That's a hopeless stance to take. So you honestly mean "let's commit to never making changes ever because that's the only thing keeping us from shoveling out crapware"?
I'm not familiar with Paizo route?
Second, because anything could be updated, you always need to check to see if it has, slowing down play; it doubles the places to check before making a ruling. (After a revised printing, I stopped looking at my print Pathfinder books and only went to the PDFs.)
Who said anything about an update?
By my scheme, the first printing's classes would be as valid and welcome to the gaming table as printing #20.
Nothing would get "updated". You would have new content just like WotC plans, only that new content would be carefully selected to shore up existing choices and not only add completely new choices.
I give you that a DM with an older PHB could want to check your newer PHB if for some reason she doesn't trust you when you say your Ranger can invoke Ranger's Mark (say) as a class feature instead of having to cast Hunter's Mark as a concentration spell. So bring it.
And if another player at that table also wants the new Ranger feature (despite also having the old PHB), why, let him!
In practice, the changes wouldn't be so many. Most players and DMs would snap them up easy.
The important part is to stay away from "updating" the game. No new rules, only options to fix what doesn't get used much.
Because the first printing could (likely would) be updated it devalues that printing and encourages people to wait for a second printing. But that just slows the time before an update.
A bit doom and gloom, but... you did read my suggestion to tell the player base that this kind of update won't happen again for at least 24 months.
Or some other sufficiently distant time that the market research dept is reasonably confident most buyers can't hold off making their purchase that long
Lastly, it creates a situation where people are told their character doesn't behave how they think, leading to an ugly surprise.
Yeah, frame it like "an ugly surprise" - that's not at all pessimistic. And who gave you the idea people "are told" things, like this was the Soviet Union or something?
Let me respond by an alternate phrasing:
Lastly, it creates a situation where people find out for themselves that the character options they thought were crap, are now strong viable options to explore, leading to a wonderful surprise.
Do note that we reach completely different conclusions based on exactly the same source material.
I'd almost prefer a revised PHB in 3-4 years with all the fixes rather than wave after wave of incremental changes.
I agree.
And I never said anything about "wave after wave" of communist invad... I mean incremental changes.
Fewer changes than a 3.5, and designed to be completely compatible. Fix some non-errata errors, work in some Sage Advice answers, and do some super minor rebalancing.
I agree.
I don't agree.
A visual cue to make it easy to see which printing you've got yes, but basically stick to the same appearance to give the notion "it's the same book - you and I are playing the same game".
I believe by keeping the same cover you send a strong signal that the book is the same, the playing base is the same, the game is one and the same.
As opposed to the divisive effect 3.5 had; splitting the player base into "we play 3.0":ers and "we play 3.5":ers.
I think, no I know, WotC wants to make sure there is only one player base: "we play D&D".
and maybe swap out a few of the weaker bits of art. But otherwise keep the same look and layout to keep down costs.
I agree.
But that might still not go over well. The community is reactive and it would still feel like asking folk to repurchase the book. If that was paired with a free document on the website and/or DMsGuild with the changed content, it might help.
I think that the important thing is for WotC not to ask folk to repurchase the book.
They have always done that. A new edition, a new cash cow.
But the idea is to stick to the PHB as an evergreen.
So there should be no big marketing push, no loud trumpeting of "all new PHB".
Just a firm and clear but not loud message: "as of yesterday, all new PHBs shipped will contain these twenty changes:
1) Ranger's Mark...
2) ...
The next such update is not planned, but will not happen before March 10 2018, if ever."
