Do you think a new edition would help?

[Glorelendil]

As with D&D, whether a new version is improved is largely a matter of taste, and new, significantly different versions tend to create schisms in the player-base.

I can certainly see improvements that could be made to The One Ring, but I don't think significantly changed rules would be universally acknowledged to be improvements. You'd just fracture the player-base.

Oh, yeah. Totally agree.

Maybe I'm in the minority that would pay for a game that only changed 5%.

[Stormcrow]

Oh, I wouldn't expect a 5% change to warrant a new version of the game. Keep the layout intact so that page references don't change. When Cubicle7 released the 11th Doctor edition of the Doctor Who game, they also published an upgrade document for those with the 10th Doctor edition. The entire monsters chapter was included, all the new character sheets, and all the new gadget cards. It was a new "edition," but it was virtually all the same new rules, with updated monsters, characters, and gadgets to reflect the new Doctor's stories. And that's a bigger change than I'd expect from any revision of TOR.

[Rich H]

As with D&D, whether a new version is improved is largely a matter of taste, and new, significantly different versions tend to create schisms in the player-base.

I can certainly see improvements that could be made to The One Ring, but I don't think significantly changed rules would be universally acknowledged to be improvements. You'd just fracture the player-base.

I think that's an important point. A good example, at least for me, is already evident between the slipcase edition and revised rules with regard to how APs are awarded. I prefer the older way of doing it.