Micah Sweet
Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
Yeah, we're a calm, easy-going bunch as a rule.A worthy challenge, since it's notoriously difficult to get grognards angry about something.
Yeah, we're a calm, easy-going bunch as a rule.A worthy challenge, since it's notoriously difficult to get grognards angry about something.
I would argue that the implicit idea that moving to 2024 books is an upgrade, like everybody knows that the new books will be (maybe just a little, but measurably) better is a problem.
Oh, 5e can definitely be improved upon, and has, by other companies. I don't see the 2024 books as an improvement, certainly not worth buying my books again for.How is that a problem?
I would hope that game developers have learned something in the ten years between about how to make the game run better. How to better present rules. How to fix outright errors.
Otherwise that means that 5e 2014 is the pinnacle of game design and presentation and cannot be improved upon. The surest road to stagnation.
it only is a problem if the expectation does not match realityHow is that a problem?
I would hope so too, but they keep asking us whether we like thingsI would hope that game developers have learned something in the ten years between about how to make the game run better. How to better present rules. How to fix outright errors.
no, it just means that WotC failed at improving it, not that it cannot be improved uponOtherwise that means that 5e 2014 is the pinnacle of game design and presentation and cannot be improved upon. The surest road to stagnation.
That's quite a cohesive vision: make a game that works for users.At a minimum I see no cohesive vision, or even a desire to actually improve anything. I only see a desire to get a high approval rating, no matter what. Offer one thing and its diametrical opposite, then run with whichever was more popular, consequences be damned
it would be if the users had one, but I am not seeing a cohesive vision reflected in what we appear to be getting, I see a back and forth with no direction on a myriad individual issuesThat's quite a cohesive vision: make a game that works for users.
Making a game that makes people actually happy seems to be a high vision indeed.it would be if the users had one, but I am not seeing a cohesive vision reflected in what we appear to be getting, I see a back and forth with no direction on a myriad individual issues
Saying ‘we should make a popular game’ is not a vision to me, that is simply a goal
I don't think you can actually do that with piecemeal testing, especially when the time from document to survey is so short. They should have developed a beta internally, then looked in the world for 6 months or a year if they really wanted gamers to put it through the ringer.Making a game that makes people actually happy seems to be a high vision indeed.
yeah, we disagree on what a vision is. It takes zero vision to say ‘I want to come up something that is popular, so it sells a lot and I get rich’.Making a game that makes people actually happy seems to be a high vision indeed.