Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Obryn" data-source="post: 6257935" data-attributes="member: 11821">You know what - let me scale this back a bit.&nbsp; Because there is something I care about here, and that's the completely insanely toxic way in which a small group of people are pushing for very specific - and, to my mind, regressive - changes in Next's design.&nbsp; Because Next doesn't have to be a game I don't want to play.I really don't care about this particular bit of nitpicky minutiae, but I do care about the broader way in which crap like this causes people to completely lose their minds.&nbsp; I mean, just yesterday, it was Damage on a Miss as the one thing which was holding you back.&nbsp; Today, it's small things moving realistic speeds that are just as fast as bigger things moving realistic speeds.&nbsp; What will it be tomorrow?&nbsp; At-will cantrips?&nbsp; Exploration rules?I don't even know, but what I do know is that - as a method of driving change in a publicly playtested rule set complete with in-depth and exhaustingly detailed surveys about every single rule - people screaming as loud as the internet will let them to overturn the vox populi of the surveys is terrible.Because like I said - D&amp;D Next didn't have to be a game I didn't want to play.&nbsp; And letting the loudest naysayers - the people arguing that something simply should not exist in the ruleset - drive game design is a bafflingly insane way to design a game.And that's all I really have to say on the topic.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Obryn, post: 6257935, member: 11821"] You know what - let me scale this back a bit. Because there is something I care about here, and that's the [I]completely insanely toxic[/I] way in which a small group of people are pushing for very specific - and, to my mind, regressive - changes in Next's design. Because Next doesn't have to be a game I don't want to play. I really don't care about this particular bit of nitpicky minutiae, but I do care about the broader way in which crap like this causes people to [I]completely lose their minds[/I]. I mean, just yesterday, it was Damage on a Miss as the one thing which was holding you back. Today, it's small things moving realistic speeds that are just as fast as bigger things moving realistic speeds. What will it be tomorrow? At-will cantrips? Exploration rules? I don't even know, but what I do know is that - as a method of driving change in a publicly playtested rule set complete with in-depth and exhaustingly detailed surveys about every single rule - people screaming as loud as the internet will let them to overturn the [I]vox populi[/I] of the surveys is terrible. Because like I said - D&D Next didn't [I]have[/I] to be a game I didn't want to play. And letting the loudest naysayers - the people arguing that something simply [I]should not exist[/I] in the ruleset - drive game design is a bafflingly insane way to design a game. And that's all I really have to say on the topic. [/QUOTE]

Verification