Our group immediately started cherry picking rules, then switched entirely. Same characters, same campaigns, same adventures, but calculating skill points is much less painful.

Absolutely, a Mr Fix-It. Having said that, when D&D went from 2e to 3e, I did switch mid-campaign. 1e to 2e was no sweat; 3.0 to 3.5 wasn’t, either. I was greatly interested in Skills & powers when that came out, and tinkered with most of it. Dragon ran that year of articles showing what was going to change in 3e, and I bought in to the concepts. I liked what I was seeing.

4th edition? Not even close. I felt ignored by WotC, and tried to stay away from the hate. Now that it’s out, the group that I am in feels too invested in 3.5 to switch now. We only just started another of the Adventure Paths we bought years ago, and we have piles more 3.5 campaign-plans to play/run.

I do run/play lots of other games, but they seem to die off rather than achieve later editions. Twilight:2000 and Traveller:2300 spawned a Burton and a Mr. Fix-it, respectively, and *then* died out. Space:1889 needed a Mr. Fix-It, but died too young.

Ditto.

I’m a bit of a revision whore, but mostly it stems from this. I want to see what has been changed and why. If there are changes made to address problems that I haven’t encountered, then I’m not interested.

I have always had a soft spot for D&D as the grand old man of the hobby, and also as the most mainstream RPG, and therefore the easiest to find new players for. That said, I have had major problems with every edition I’ve played (AD&D, 3E, 3.5), but I was able to get excited about each subsequent edition because I could see that the developers were making changes to things that bothered me. THAC0 made me insane; 3E did away with it. 3E classes were often insane and sloppy; 3.5 cleaned them up a bit. I won’t get into the 3.5 ->4E issue, since it’s still too hot, but suffice it to say 4E addressed a lot of the problems I had with 3.5, and now I am very much enjoying D&D in a way I was only able to before if I shut my mind off completely.

Similarly with White Wolf. I owned Vampire and Mage 2E, then Revised, then happily switched to NWoD because I could see why the changes were being made, and I liked how they addressed my complaints about the previous edition.

I hadn’t heard there was a Burning Wheel revision coming down the pipe! Honestly, I love BW; I would just have liked a re-write to put the book in a more user-friendly condition. I’m excited to see what Crane comes up with.

So, really I couldn’t care less. If we get a Burton, we’ll decide if we like the new edition and if we like it enough to disrupt the current campaign, then move forwards from there.

If the old rules system is good enough, then (by definition) it’s good enough. I’ll take a look at what’s in the new hotness, and if it’s that much better, I’ll go with it. Even in a Fix-It update, I’d be curious to see what they tweaked. (Note to game developers: I also want to see WHY it was tweaked.)

There are a few other factors as well. If everyone in my game is mesmerized by the New Hotness, then I’d better buy a book and start reading. If our campaign is going strong, and the consensus is to hold off, then I’d better keep away from the “Selling” page on eBay…

When I start a new campaign, I either have a story or a system already in mind. If a system looks fun, I’ll choose it. If it looks like it’ll fit the story I want, I’ll choose it. I don’t care when it came out.

Then all of a sudden 4e came out, and the DM and one other player decided that we should abandon our 3.5 campaign and play 4e. We all made generic characters, with which we had no stake in. A few of us were quite upset about how the whole thing went down, but we’re all good friends so we didn’t make much of a fuss about it.

I have played a little 4e since then, and am about to start playing in a new 4e campaign which will alternate with the 3.5 campaign that I DM. I’m really looking forward to getting to play, even if it’s not 3.5.

I guess what I’m saying is that Mr. Fix-it and Burton are both fine with me, as long as they don’t completely derail an ongoing campaign.

But if we can all get the new books cheap enough, or enough copies to make it worthwhile, we’re willing to start the next game with new rules. Unfortunately, having to shell out major cash for a new system keeps us tied to old rules more often then not.

Really? Publishers do what they think is right, I look at the rules and decide if I want to sink my money into the books. I bought 4e books as my first D&D books after having played smatterings of 3e over the years, not playing more or buying because 3e was *bad*. Worse than what I was playing at the time, anyway. No matter which they do, it’s up to rules quality. Make me want a system, however you do it, and you’ve done good.

A Burton style change will encourage me to ignore it while my ongoing game continues, since “upgrading” or changing over would dilute the current game too much. I’ll finish out the current campaign as is (and without any pesky new books to change everything mid-stream!), and look at the new Edition when we’re picking our next game. [At least, that's how we handled the WoD and D&D 2->3 and 3->4 changes.]

Mr. Fix-Its aren’t generally marketed to old players and a publisher often takes pains to emphasize this. The assumption is that old players won’t need to buy a new Mr. Fix-It to keep current; an errata/update sheet will enable them to use their old book with new material.

Burtons are marketed to both old and new players. The changes are significant enough that the old material is obsolete. Old players now have a choice; stick with what they have (with no new support) or purchase the new edition.

So, to take D&D 4e as an example, there’s ample evidence that 4e appealed to gamers that already owned 3.5. There’s also ample evidence that WOTC hoped 3.5 gamers would purchase 4e. There’s also ample evidence that some 3.5 players didn’t purchase 4e.

My group is an example. We still play 3.5e. No one wants to invest the money in the new books, or the time to learn a whole new system when we were just getting good at the 3.5 system. Particularly not in the middle of a campaign! With a major re-write of the rules, you may be losing a core contingent of your audience.

Many of the people who play RPGs are also the people who get in epic flame wars over their choice of text editor. This type of loyalty may carry over into their RPG edition as well. Just like the “new” Star Wars movies (1, 2, & 3) angered some of the core fans, but brought in a whole new generation of fans, so too did 4e with D&D. I’ve heard of people rejecting it, and switching to Swords & Sorcery for a more authentic 1st edition play style. I’ve also heard of people selling their first born to get advanced copies of 4e. (ok not really but you get my drift.)

So your unsupported statement of Burton-esque rewrites appealing to the old/current players strikes me as wrong.

I remember being in a long-term campaign back in 1989, when 2nd Ed D&D came out. We not only made the transition from 1st ed to 2nd ed, but also into the Forgotten Realms setting. The mechanics were easy to deal with, but playing through the changes were another thing. I played a human cleric, and actually went through a few game sessions without any spell power, because my god was gone. Eventually he transitioned into Lathander, and all was happy again. If players are up for it, and the DM can weather the mechanical changes, it an be a fun and wild ride.