D&D (2024) Do players really want balance?

[Thomas Shey]

In my opinion, quality of a TTRPG means that people enjoy playing the game and continue to play it. Therefore it is a quality game for me and the people I play with. If we broaden that out to the larger target market we can't directly measure enjoyment or retention, the only thing we can do is extrapolate those from the data we have. The data we have is sales and, continued sales growth (up to a certain point anyway, eventually we'll see market saturation).

By your definitions and the irrelevant topics brought up on this thread, the word quality has no meaning.

By the definition you seem to be using here, only you matter.

 

[Oofta]

By the definition you seem to be using here, only you matter.

Quite the opposite. I'm looking at the best aggregate opinions of the target market. We don't have the resources to do direct surveys so I use the best alternative indicator that we have as an indirect measurement.

Can you give a definition or measurement of what makes a quality TTRPG that isn't dependent on your personal opinion?

 

[Thomas Shey]

Quite the opposite. I'm looking at the best aggregate opinions of the target market. We don't have the resources to do direct surveys so I use the best alternative indicator that we have as an indirect measurement.

Can you give a definition or measurement of what makes a quality TTRPG that isn't dependent on your personal opinion?

Given time, sure. Its not going to be all things for all people, but there should be some overlapping Venn diagrams in it. I'm betting other people on here could to, and even if some of theirs would be things I wouldn't agree with, I'd at least find them likely more useful than just point at popularity like it means something beyond "good enough" on quality.

I've explained this before. Is repeating it to you a few more times useful to you? Or do you just want to be irritable and not like it a few more times?

 

[Oofta]

Given time, sure. Its not going to be all things for all people, but there should be some overlapping Venn diagrams in it. I'm betting other people on here could to, and even if some of theirs would be things I wouldn't agree with, I'd at least find them likely more useful than just point at popularity like it means something beyond "good enough" on quality.

I've explained this before. Is repeating it to you a few more times useful to you? Or do you just want to be irritable and not like it a few more times?

We just disagree. Any diagrams are just measurement of different factors that you find important.

 

[Thomas Shey]

We just disagree. Any diagrams are just measurement of different factors that you find important.

And I disagree with that. So are we done with this exchange?

 

[Oofta]

And I disagree with that. So are we done with this exchange?

We only got back into it because you can't explain how this statement

No, its really not. You can design things to maximize sales in all kinds of ways that are actually malign for the end user.

relates to D&D. Since you never did ... have a good one.

 

[Thomas Shey]

We only got back into it because you can't explain how this statement

No, we got back to it because you apparently wanted to get back to it.

relates to D&D. Since you never did ... have a good one.

It was a general comment about trying to lump design quality with product success. I don't think that's particularly difficult to parse.

 

[Oofta]

No, we got back to it because you apparently wanted to get back to it.



It was a general comment about trying to lump design quality with product success. I don't think that's particularly difficult to parse.

You stated that "You can design things to maximize sales in all kinds of ways that are actually malign for the end user." I asked how that was relevant to D&D. You did not answer the question, you just changed the goalposts. Again.

In any case, any judgement of quality is going to come down to either personal opinion or what you deem worthy of measurement. I know what I deem worthy of measurement.

 

[Voadam]

Yeah, you can't go by an individual game, because the people in that game may simply select away from options that are not mutually competitive (by whatever standards they use) where other people, potentially a lot of them, can be trying to play characters that are theoretically useable in the same game but really--not. Rifts one has the advantage that this sort of thing is blatant enough its hard to miss, and no one really expects that in most games the City Rat and the Dragon are going to work well together in the same game. I doubt the same dynamic applies in most D&D-adjacent games.

Yeah, I've had great fun in a lot of games with unbalanced classes and options by strictly avoiding the ones that look like they would be not fun for me. I have enjoyed the design of games more though where more options were things I did not want to actively avoid.

 

[Thomas Shey]

You stated that "You can design things to maximize sales in all kinds of ways that are actually malign for the end user." I asked how that was relevant to D&D. You did not answer the question, you just changed the goalposts. Again.

I didn't change the goalposts, I suggested you should be able to figure it out since you didn't drop into the thread in the last few pages. But apparently you were just asking so you could set up an opportunity for a cheap shot because you don't like the way the conversation is going.

Look, if you're that irritable about how this conversation (not just mine, but other people with the same position) is going, I know there's a report button right there.