Advanced Notice would be nice. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Advanced Notice would be nice. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
StevenO
08-16-07, 08:18 PM With the anouncement of 4th Edition coming out in May 08 would it be so bad to have informed us of this when work began? I believe that when work on this latest edition started there was a good idea when or at least a target date for its release which would have been nice to know.

With Magic, most players know that the Standard format along with others shift and can plan how they'd like to play the game around that. Now changing DnD editions may be a bigger deal but if we'd been told two years ago that 4th would come out in '08 it may have effected some buying decisions but at least we'd have been making informed decisions. More importantly you wouldn't upset the community with a sudden shift it the game that seems to come from no where. I've recently seen posts asking if a person should get into 3.5 and based on statements that 4ed would be a long ways off the general answer would have been yes. Now you probably have an upset customer who will see his book obsolete in under a year; had the community known that 4e was coming out we may have advised waiting but probably would have still recommended getting the feet wet with 3.5.

I guess I'm wondering am I the only one who would have liked Wizards to be more upfront about when 4th edition was going to be released? Advanced knowledge probably wouldn't have changed my buying but would have enable me to give better advice to others interested in the game. Knowing about the new edition more than a year in advance would also have gone a long ways towards preventing this "sting of betrayal" with the sudden anouncement.
ArcTan
08-16-07, 08:20 PM Work almost certainly began when D&D 3.5 was released, if it's being released now. Keeping mum about this was probably the strategy from the beginning.

The Osborne Effect, if you haven't heard of it, is the number-one reason things like this are *always* kept as secret as a company can reasonably keep them. There are a lot of people who, if they'd known 4e was in the pipeline five years down, would've held off on buying D&D 3.5 or been more reluctant to buy it in lieu of other products, meaning profits would've plummeted and there'd've been no money to make 4e at all.
Dragonsblood
08-16-07, 08:25 PM 3.5 does not become obsolete when 4ed comes out. The majority of players are probably going to stick with 3.5 for awhile after 4ed comes out because it's more complete with the supplements and because it's more familiar. Your books still work just as well anyway as long as your group stays with 3.5. Personally, I'm probably going to wait at least a year or two to buy 4ed in case they come out with 4.5.

Also remember that WotC is a business. They probably thought that they'd make less money if they announced 4ed 2 years ago, and I'd agree with them. I think a year is more than enough of a courtesy warning.
DrStalker
08-16-07, 11:20 PM With the anouncement of 4th Edition coming out in May 08 would it be so bad to have informed us of this when work began?

To save you some grief next time, work on D&D 5.0 has started and is in the very early concept phases.
StevenO
08-17-07, 12:05 AM To save you some grief next time, work on D&D 5.0 has started and is in the very early concept phases.
And do you suppose there is a target date for the release of 5.0 yet?

I wouldn't deny Wizards the right/need to update the material but I do think it would be nice it they'd share the timeline for such major changes.
zorgling25
08-17-07, 01:01 AM I guess I'm wondering am I the only one who would have liked Wizards to be more upfront about when 4th edition was going to be released? Advanced knowledge probably wouldn't have changed my buying but would have enable me to give better advice to others interested in the game. Knowing about the new edition more than a year in advance would also have gone a long ways towards preventing this "sting of betrayal" with the sudden anouncement.

People are complaining that they "just bought a new book" for 3.5E or something before the announcement. The way I see it, if they had announced 4E earlier, they'd get slammed at release time when they couldn't meet their original deadline anyway (its not easy to plan that far ahead). At least this way, people will let off steam before the books are actually in stores.
Loki5654
08-17-07, 01:11 AM Let me put it like this:

How many months of notice do you give your boss before you take a week's vacation?

I mean, you are going to take a vacation eventually, right? Why not tell your boss now that you're going to take a vacation in 11 months?

In reality, you know you're eventually going to take a vacation, but you have to wait until the time grows closer before you can give your boss notice of the exact dates. So there is no point in telling them that you are going on vacation eventually.

Wizards knew they were going to release 4E eventually, but it wouldn't have done anyone any good for them to announce it until they had exact dates.

As a final note: Buy all the books you want. But you don't have any say in how the company is run until you buy a share of stock. Companies today aren't accountable to their customers, they are accountable to their shareholders. Sad, but true.
zorgling25
08-17-07, 01:13 AM Let me put it like this:

How many months of notice do you give your boss before you take a week's vacation?

I mean, you are going to take a vacation eventually, right? Why not tell your boss now that you're going to take a vacation in 11 months?

In reality, you know you're eventually going to take a vacation, but you have to wait until the time grows closer before you can give your boss notice of the exact dates. So there is no point in telling them that you are going on vacation eventually.

Wizards knew they were going to release 4E eventually, but it wouldn't have done anyone any good for them to announce it until they had exact dates.

As a final note: Buy all the books you want. But you don't have any say in how the company is run until you buy a share of stock. Companies today aren't accountable to their customers, they are accountable to their shareholders. Sad, but true.

Well said, right there. You said what I was trying to say, but better.

As an addendum, your boss really would have his head in the clouds if he really thought you were never going to take a vacation. By the same token, you really have to have had your head in the clouds if you thought 4E was never going to come.
Dontgothere
08-17-07, 01:13 AM 3.5 does not become obsolete when 4ed comes out. The majority of players are probably going to stick with 3.5 for awhile after 4ed comes out because it's more complete with the supplements and because it's more familiar. Your books still work just as well anyway as long as your group stays with 3.5. Personally, I'm probably going to wait at least a year or two to buy 4ed in case they come out with 4.5.

Also remember that WotC is a business. They probably thought that they'd make less money if they announced 4ed 2 years ago, and I'd agree with them. I think a year is more than enough of a courtesy warning.

From August to May is not a year. :)
Dontgothere
08-17-07, 01:16 AM Let me put it like this:

How many months of notice do you give your boss before you take a week's vacation?

I mean, you are going to take a vacation eventually, right? Why not tell your boss now that you're going to take a vacation in 11 months?

In reality, you know you're eventually going to take a vacation, but you have to wait until the time grows closer before you can give your boss notice of the exact dates. So there is no point in telling them that you are going on vacation eventually.

Wizards knew they were going to release 4E eventually, but it wouldn't have done anyone any good for them to announce it until they had exact dates.

As a final note: Buy all the books you want. But you don't have any say in how the company is run until you buy a share of stock. Companies today aren't accountable to their customers, they are accountable to their shareholders. Sad, but true.

Ultimately every company is made or broken by the customers. I should know I own three businesses. The shareholders are not your bosses ultimately the customers are. Without profits from sales -- provided by customers -- the shareholders might as well be holding shares of grass. I find it funny to see how little the people on these boards know about actual business.
Loki5654
08-17-07, 01:32 AM I should know I own three businesses.
Of those three, how many are publicly traded on the NYSE?
Dontgothere
08-17-07, 01:40 AM Of those three, how many are publicly traded on the NYSE?

Both public and private companies rely on customers to grow and exist. Thus your question is quite irrelevant and the status of my companies shall remain unknown.

KNOW THIS: You will never be able to prove businesses don't need customers. It's a flawed argument you are trying to make that fails to convince.
zorgling25
08-17-07, 02:06 AM Both public and private companies rely on customers to grow and exist. Thus your question is quite irrelevant and the status of my companies shall remain unknown.

KNOW THIS: You will never be able to prove businesses don't need customers. It's a flawed argument you are trying to make that fails to convince.

I'm not arguing that businesses don't need customers. I'm saying this "lying" is not an issue of customer satisfaction. I'll be a satisfied customer when I know that the books are worth the money I'll pay for them, and this isn't going to change that in the slightest.
Loki5654
08-17-07, 02:08 AM Both public and private companies rely on customers to grow and exist. Thus your question is quite irrelevant and the status of my companies shall remain unknown.

KNOW THIS: You will never be able to prove businesses don't need customers. It's a flawed argument you are trying to make that fails to convince.
Don't think I didn't notice how you dodged the question.

I never said businesses don't need customers. I said that publicly traded companies are not directly accountable to their customers, they are accountable to their shareholders.

I ask again: Of the three companies you (supposedly) own, how many are publicly traded on the NYSE?
Dontgothere
08-17-07, 02:33 AM Don't think I didn't notice how you dodged the question.

I never said businesses don't need customers. I said that publicly traded companies are not directly accountable to their customers, they are accountable to their shareholders.

It doesn't matter who they are "accountable" to because without the customers there would be no business. Are you starting to see the light?

Moreover no shareholder that knows where his money coems from is going to advocate disrespecting the customer base.

Try again.

I ask again: Of the three companies you (supposedly) own, how many are publicly traded on the NYSE?

I like the veiled jibe in there with the "(supposedly)." It is expected by one whom was denied an answer to their irrelevant question as documented below:

Thus your question is quite irrelevant and the status of my companies shall remain unknown.

Obviously you missed that part. Run along now.
Loki5654
08-17-07, 02:42 AM Obviously you missed that part. Run along now.
I didn't miss it, I just disagree with you on its relevance.

You claim that your ownership (which remains alleged) of companies makes you an expert on how a company like Wizards is run. I challenge that expertise by asking if your companies are publicly traded like Wizards.

My point remains that an individual customer of a product makes little to no difference to a publicly traded company. The actions of individual stockholders do make a difference.
Dontgothere
08-17-07, 02:51 AM I didn't miss it, I just disagree with you on its relevance.

You claim that your ownership (which remains alleged) of companies makes you an expert on how a company like Wizards is run. I challenge that expertise by asking if your companies are publicly traded like Wizards.

My point remains that an individual customer of a product makes little to no difference to a publicly traded company. The actions of individual stockholders do make a difference.

I like how you say "individual customer" to attempt to change the FACT that with no customers there is no business.

The customers are the reason why those shareholders can exist. Thus the customers -- and the money that comes from them -- is the bottom line.

So you can challenge all day but claim you don't need customers for a business that sells things to run and you're challenging reality itself. A losing battle indeed...and now I am off to bed it is late here.
Ranger REG
08-17-07, 04:42 AM With the anouncement of 4th Edition coming out in May 08 would it be so bad to have informed us of this when work began? I believe that when work on this latest edition started there was a good idea when or at least a target date for its release which would have been nice to know.
Yeah, because someone else could steal WotC's thunder, kinda like when Decipher made a surprise announcement at GenCon (when WotC released the 3e Player's Handbook when they stole the Star Trek RPG publishing license from under WotC (who acquired Last Unicorn Games company a month earlier).

I guess I'm wondering am I the only one who would have liked Wizards to be more upfront about when 4th edition was going to be released? Advanced knowledge probably wouldn't have changed my buying but would have enable me to give better advice to others interested in the game. Knowing about the new edition more than a year in advance would also have gone a long ways towards preventing this "sting of betrayal" with the sudden anouncement.
Well, that depends.

If you think that the 4e announcement now signaled the start of development, then they got less than 9 months of cramming. That means they could err more frequently because of the deadline.

If they have already started the 4e development, and the 4e announcement now signaled that they're in the Beta stage of development (which means they're halfway to completing the rules to be sent for playtesting), then I can accept that.

Besides, if they announce it earlier, like 12 months ago, you'd be coming here with a needed fix on 4e information.

You: "Anythingnewanythingnewanythingnew?" :twitch:

I might have to tranquilize you. :elf:
Crimhthan_The_Great
08-17-07, 07:47 AM With the anouncement of 4th Edition coming out in May 08 would it be so bad to have informed us of this when work began? I believe that when work on this latest edition started there was a good idea when or at least a target date for its release which would have been nice to know.

With Magic, most players know that the Standard format along with others shift and can plan how they'd like to play the game around that. Now changing DnD editions may be a bigger deal but if we'd been told two years ago that 4th would come out in '08 it may have effected some buying decisions but at least we'd have been making informed decisions. More importantly you wouldn't upset the community with a sudden shift it the game that seems to come from no where. I've recently seen posts asking if a person should get into 3.5 and based on statements that 4ed would be a long ways off the general answer would have been yes. Now you probably have an upset customer who will see his book obsolete in under a year; had the community known that 4e was coming out we may have advised waiting but probably would have still recommended getting the feet wet with 3.5.

I guess I'm wondering am I the only one who would have liked Wizards to be more upfront about when 4th edition was going to be released? Advanced knowledge probably wouldn't have changed my buying but would have enable me to give better advice to others interested in the game. Knowing about the new edition more than a year in advance would also have gone a long ways towards preventing this "sting of betrayal" with the sudden anouncement.

Advance notice would only be given by people who cared what you thought. Those who don't remember history are condemned to repeat it.
Naderion
08-17-07, 09:15 AM Is 11 Months before the release of the Monster Manual not early enough? The bulk of the 4th Editions will not be out before one and a half year from now.
WizO_Brak
08-17-07, 09:21 AM If you have concerns about the handling of the 4E information, there is a thread to voice those concerns here: http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=905845 that is being read by Gamer_Zer0.

As such, I'll close this thread and ask that the conversation be resumed in the above thread.

Thanks!

~Brak

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
StevenO 08-16-07, 08:18 PM	With the anouncement of 4th Edition coming out in May 08 would it be so bad to have informed us of this when work began? I believe that when work on this latest edition started there was a good idea when or at least a target date for its release which would have been nice to know. With Magic, most players know that the Standard format along with others shift and can plan how they'd like to play the game around that. Now changing DnD editions may be a bigger deal but if we'd been told two years ago that 4th would come out in '08 it may have effected some buying decisions but at least we'd have been making informed decisions. More importantly you wouldn't upset the community with a sudden shift it the game that seems to come from no where. I've recently seen posts asking if a person should get into 3.5 and based on statements that 4ed would be a long ways off the general answer would have been yes. Now you probably have an upset customer who will see his book obsolete in under a year; had the community known that 4e was coming out we may have advised waiting but probably would have still recommended getting the feet wet with 3.5. I guess I'm wondering am I the only one who would have liked Wizards to be more upfront about when 4th edition was going to be released? Advanced knowledge probably wouldn't have changed my buying but would have enable me to give better advice to others interested in the game. Knowing about the new edition more than a year in advance would also have gone a long ways towards preventing this "sting of betrayal" with the sudden anouncement.
ArcTan 08-16-07, 08:20 PM	Work almost certainly began when D&D 3.5 was released, if it's being released now. Keeping mum about this was probably the strategy from the beginning. The Osborne Effect, if you haven't heard of it, is the number-one reason things like this are always kept as secret as a company can reasonably keep them. There are a lot of people who, if they'd known 4e was in the pipeline five years down, would've held off on buying D&D 3.5 or been more reluctant to buy it in lieu of other products, meaning profits would've plummeted and there'd've been no money to make 4e at all.
Dragonsblood 08-16-07, 08:25 PM	3.5 does not become obsolete when 4ed comes out. The majority of players are probably going to stick with 3.5 for awhile after 4ed comes out because it's more complete with the supplements and because it's more familiar. Your books still work just as well anyway as long as your group stays with 3.5. Personally, I'm probably going to wait at least a year or two to buy 4ed in case they come out with 4.5. Also remember that WotC is a business. They probably thought that they'd make less money if they announced 4ed 2 years ago, and I'd agree with them. I think a year is more than enough of a courtesy warning.
DrStalker 08-16-07, 11:20 PM	With the anouncement of 4th Edition coming out in May 08 would it be so bad to have informed us of this when work began? To save you some grief next time, work on D&D 5.0 has started and is in the very early concept phases.
StevenO 08-17-07, 12:05 AM	To save you some grief next time, work on D&D 5.0 has started and is in the very early concept phases. And do you suppose there is a target date for the release of 5.0 yet? I wouldn't deny Wizards the right/need to update the material but I do think it would be nice it they'd share the timeline for such major changes.
zorgling25 08-17-07, 01:01 AM	I guess I'm wondering am I the only one who would have liked Wizards to be more upfront about when 4th edition was going to be released? Advanced knowledge probably wouldn't have changed my buying but would have enable me to give better advice to others interested in the game. Knowing about the new edition more than a year in advance would also have gone a long ways towards preventing this "sting of betrayal" with the sudden anouncement. People are complaining that they "just bought a new book" for 3.5E or something before the announcement. The way I see it, if they had announced 4E earlier, they'd get slammed at release time when they couldn't meet their original deadline anyway (its not easy to plan that far ahead). At least this way, people will let off steam before the books are actually in stores.
Loki5654 08-17-07, 01:11 AM	Let me put it like this: How many months of notice do you give your boss before you take a week's vacation? I mean, you are going to take a vacation eventually, right? Why not tell your boss now that you're going to take a vacation in 11 months? In reality, you know you're eventually going to take a vacation, but you have to wait until the time grows closer before you can give your boss notice of the exact dates. So there is no point in telling them that you are going on vacation eventually. Wizards knew they were going to release 4E eventually, but it wouldn't have done anyone any good for them to announce it until they had exact dates. As a final note: Buy all the books you want. But you don't have any say in how the company is run until you buy a share of stock. Companies today aren't accountable to their customers, they are accountable to their shareholders. Sad, but true.
zorgling25 08-17-07, 01:13 AM	Let me put it like this: How many months of notice do you give your boss before you take a week's vacation? I mean, you are going to take a vacation eventually, right? Why not tell your boss now that you're going to take a vacation in 11 months? In reality, you know you're eventually going to take a vacation, but you have to wait until the time grows closer before you can give your boss notice of the exact dates. So there is no point in telling them that you are going on vacation eventually. Wizards knew they were going to release 4E eventually, but it wouldn't have done anyone any good for them to announce it until they had exact dates. As a final note: Buy all the books you want. But you don't have any say in how the company is run until you buy a share of stock. Companies today aren't accountable to their customers, they are accountable to their shareholders. Sad, but true. Well said, right there. You said what I was trying to say, but better. As an addendum, your boss really would have his head in the clouds if he really thought you were never going to take a vacation. By the same token, you really have to have had your head in the clouds if you thought 4E was never going to come.
Dontgothere 08-17-07, 01:13 AM	3.5 does not become obsolete when 4ed comes out. The majority of players are probably going to stick with 3.5 for awhile after 4ed comes out because it's more complete with the supplements and because it's more familiar. Your books still work just as well anyway as long as your group stays with 3.5. Personally, I'm probably going to wait at least a year or two to buy 4ed in case they come out with 4.5. Also remember that WotC is a business. They probably thought that they'd make less money if they announced 4ed 2 years ago, and I'd agree with them. I think a year is more than enough of a courtesy warning. From August to May is not a year. :)
Dontgothere 08-17-07, 01:16 AM	Let me put it like this: How many months of notice do you give your boss before you take a week's vacation? I mean, you are going to take a vacation eventually, right? Why not tell your boss now that you're going to take a vacation in 11 months? In reality, you know you're eventually going to take a vacation, but you have to wait until the time grows closer before you can give your boss notice of the exact dates. So there is no point in telling them that you are going on vacation eventually. Wizards knew they were going to release 4E eventually, but it wouldn't have done anyone any good for them to announce it until they had exact dates. As a final note: Buy all the books you want. But you don't have any say in how the company is run until you buy a share of stock. Companies today aren't accountable to their customers, they are accountable to their shareholders. Sad, but true. Ultimately every company is made or broken by the customers. I should know I own three businesses. The shareholders are not your bosses ultimately the customers are. Without profits from sales -- provided by customers -- the shareholders might as well be holding shares of grass. I find it funny to see how little the people on these boards know about actual business.
Loki5654 08-17-07, 01:32 AM	I should know I own three businesses. Of those three, how many are publicly traded on the NYSE?
Dontgothere 08-17-07, 01:40 AM	Of those three, how many are publicly traded on the NYSE? Both public and private companies rely on customers to grow and exist. Thus your question is quite irrelevant and the status of my companies shall remain unknown. KNOW THIS: You will never be able to prove businesses don't need customers. It's a flawed argument you are trying to make that fails to convince.
zorgling25 08-17-07, 02:06 AM	Both public and private companies rely on customers to grow and exist. Thus your question is quite irrelevant and the status of my companies shall remain unknown. KNOW THIS: You will never be able to prove businesses don't need customers. It's a flawed argument you are trying to make that fails to convince. I'm not arguing that businesses don't need customers. I'm saying this "lying" is not an issue of customer satisfaction. I'll be a satisfied customer when I know that the books are worth the money I'll pay for them, and this isn't going to change that in the slightest.
Loki5654 08-17-07, 02:08 AM	Both public and private companies rely on customers to grow and exist. Thus your question is quite irrelevant and the status of my companies shall remain unknown. KNOW THIS: You will never be able to prove businesses don't need customers. It's a flawed argument you are trying to make that fails to convince. Don't think I didn't notice how you dodged the question. I never said businesses don't need customers. I said that publicly traded companies are not directly accountable to their customers, they are accountable to their shareholders. I ask again: Of the three companies you (supposedly) own, how many are publicly traded on the NYSE?
Dontgothere 08-17-07, 02:33 AM	Don't think I didn't notice how you dodged the question. I never said businesses don't need customers. I said that publicly traded companies are not directly accountable to their customers, they are accountable to their shareholders. It doesn't matter who they are "accountable" to because without the customers there would be no business. Are you starting to see the light? Moreover no shareholder that knows where his money coems from is going to advocate disrespecting the customer base. Try again. I ask again: Of the three companies you (supposedly) own, how many are publicly traded on the NYSE? I like the veiled jibe in there with the "(supposedly)." It is expected by one whom was denied an answer to their irrelevant question as documented below: Thus your question is quite irrelevant and the status of my companies shall remain unknown. Obviously you missed that part. Run along now.
Loki5654 08-17-07, 02:42 AM	Obviously you missed that part. Run along now. I didn't miss it, I just disagree with you on its relevance. You claim that your ownership (which remains alleged) of companies makes you an expert on how a company like Wizards is run. I challenge that expertise by asking if your companies are publicly traded like Wizards. My point remains that an individual customer of a product makes little to no difference to a publicly traded company. The actions of individual stockholders do make a difference.
Dontgothere 08-17-07, 02:51 AM	I didn't miss it, I just disagree with you on its relevance. You claim that your ownership (which remains alleged) of companies makes you an expert on how a company like Wizards is run. I challenge that expertise by asking if your companies are publicly traded like Wizards. My point remains that an individual customer of a product makes little to no difference to a publicly traded company. The actions of individual stockholders do make a difference. I like how you say "individual customer" to attempt to change the FACT that with no customers there is no business. The customers are the reason why those shareholders can exist. Thus the customers -- and the money that comes from them -- is the bottom line. So you can challenge all day but claim you don't need customers for a business that sells things to run and you're challenging reality itself. A losing battle indeed...and now I am off to bed it is late here.
Ranger REG 08-17-07, 04:42 AM	With the anouncement of 4th Edition coming out in May 08 would it be so bad to have informed us of this when work began? I believe that when work on this latest edition started there was a good idea when or at least a target date for its release which would have been nice to know. Yeah, because someone else could steal WotC's thunder, kinda like when Decipher made a surprise announcement at GenCon (when WotC released the 3e Player's Handbook when they stole the Star Trek RPG publishing license from under WotC (who acquired Last Unicorn Games company a month earlier). I guess I'm wondering am I the only one who would have liked Wizards to be more upfront about when 4th edition was going to be released? Advanced knowledge probably wouldn't have changed my buying but would have enable me to give better advice to others interested in the game. Knowing about the new edition more than a year in advance would also have gone a long ways towards preventing this "sting of betrayal" with the sudden anouncement. Well, that depends. If you think that the 4e announcement now signaled the start of development, then they got less than 9 months of cramming. That means they could err more frequently because of the deadline. If they have already started the 4e development, and the 4e announcement now signaled that they're in the Beta stage of development (which means they're halfway to completing the rules to be sent for playtesting), then I can accept that. Besides, if they announce it earlier, like 12 months ago, you'd be coming here with a needed fix on 4e information. You: "Anythingnewanythingnewanythingnew?" :twitch: I might have to tranquilize you. :elf:
Crimhthan_The_Great 08-17-07, 07:47 AM	With the anouncement of 4th Edition coming out in May 08 would it be so bad to have informed us of this when work began? I believe that when work on this latest edition started there was a good idea when or at least a target date for its release which would have been nice to know. With Magic, most players know that the Standard format along with others shift and can plan how they'd like to play the game around that. Now changing DnD editions may be a bigger deal but if we'd been told two years ago that 4th would come out in '08 it may have effected some buying decisions but at least we'd have been making informed decisions. More importantly you wouldn't upset the community with a sudden shift it the game that seems to come from no where. I've recently seen posts asking if a person should get into 3.5 and based on statements that 4ed would be a long ways off the general answer would have been yes. Now you probably have an upset customer who will see his book obsolete in under a year; had the community known that 4e was coming out we may have advised waiting but probably would have still recommended getting the feet wet with 3.5. I guess I'm wondering am I the only one who would have liked Wizards to be more upfront about when 4th edition was going to be released? Advanced knowledge probably wouldn't have changed my buying but would have enable me to give better advice to others interested in the game. Knowing about the new edition more than a year in advance would also have gone a long ways towards preventing this "sting of betrayal" with the sudden anouncement. Advance notice would only be given by people who cared what you thought. Those who don't remember history are condemned to repeat it.
Naderion 08-17-07, 09:15 AM	Is 11 Months before the release of the Monster Manual not early enough? The bulk of the 4th Editions will not be out before one and a half year from now.
WizO_Brak 08-17-07, 09:21 AM	If you have concerns about the handling of the 4E information, there is a thread to voice those concerns here: http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=905845 that is being read by Gamer_Zer0. As such, I'll close this thread and ask that the conversation be resumed in the above thread. Thanks! ~Brak