Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
The Paladin and the Stirges
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5809953" data-attributes="member: 54877"><p>That is only true to the extent that you think that:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Game 1 is an option.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">That if pursued it will be well done to realize those preferences.</li> </ul><p>If they decide, instead, to go without the options, for Game 3, which caters to my preferences, but not yours, then Game 2 would have been a far better choice for you. </p><p> </p><p>I think when most of us are saying that the modular approach is better, it is implicit that there is a certain level of expectation that some of what WotC will do is not our preference, and that some of the stuff that is our preference will need tweaking.</p><p> </p><p>I've seen an awful lot of lobbying for A through Z over the last few years, some of it quite bitter, and done in a vacuum of expectations that doesn't even acknowledge all the other, similar lobbying going on at the same time--sometimes even the same topic. Namely, that if they do A the way expected, then B through Z are out in the cold by definition. And same for any other choice. When the thing being lobbied for is excluding the majority of the audience, you may very well get it--but I wouldn't bank on keeping it long.</p><p> </p><p>Short version: I want options to handle my preferences so that I'm more likely to get my preferences, and so that other people get their preferences, and thus will stop lobbying to remove mine. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite8" alt=":D" title="Big grin :D" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":D" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5809953, member: 54877"] That is only true to the extent that you think that: [LIST] [*]Game 1 is an option. [*]That if pursued it will be well done to realize those preferences. [/LIST]If they decide, instead, to go without the options, for Game 3, which caters to my preferences, but not yours, then Game 2 would have been a far better choice for you. I think when most of us are saying that the modular approach is better, it is implicit that there is a certain level of expectation that some of what WotC will do is not our preference, and that some of the stuff that is our preference will need tweaking. I've seen an awful lot of lobbying for A through Z over the last few years, some of it quite bitter, and done in a vacuum of expectations that doesn't even acknowledge all the other, similar lobbying going on at the same time--sometimes even the same topic. Namely, that if they do A the way expected, then B through Z are out in the cold by definition. And same for any other choice. When the thing being lobbied for is excluding the majority of the audience, you may very well get it--but I wouldn't bank on keeping it long. Short version: I want options to handle my preferences so that I'm more likely to get my preferences, and so that other people get their preferences, and thus will stop lobbying to remove mine. :D [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
The Paladin and the Stirges
Top