Re: Discussion topic - rewriting (future) history....?

>Amen on the needed work, but I'd have to disagree about the importance
of
>the fluff. It tends to be the major driver in anything new on the
market,
>including new versions.
>
>The_Beast

Just a follow-up note to all: Please DO NOT read anything more into 
this than its face value - I simply asked the question as an 
interesting discussion point for the list, following a conversation 
with someone at SELWG this weekend. It's not something that will take 
up time and effort, I just thought it might provoke some interesting 
list traffic.....

Jon (GZG)

>
>Jerry Han <jhan@warpfish.com> wrote on 10/20/2011 10:14:23 AM:
>
>***snippage***
>
>>  My thought is, any time you spend considering the backstory canon
would
>>  probably be better spent working on minis or co-coordinating with
new
>>  rulesets.  In the end, we didn't play FT because of backstory
(though
>it's
>>  always nice to have) - we played FT because, it had good and fast
rules
>>  and nice looking miniatures.  I don't think revising the backstory
>>  will generate much, if anything in the way of new business, and will
>>  risk alienating anybody who feels the 'backstory' has become less
>>  'realistic' by the changes.
>>
>>  JGH