Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="RFisher" data-source="post: 3714014" data-attributes="member: 3608">On the &quot;just ignore extra complexity&quot; theme:I've played games that labelled a lot of stuff as optional/advanced. But then when you pointed out a difficulty with the game, the answer was &quot;this advanced rule fixes that&quot;. The game pretended to be modular, but it really wasn't. Ignoring the advanced rules meant you had an incomplete game rather than a lighter version of the game.I don't mind a complex game that is modular so that I can ignore the complexities without having to manually patch the hole left by what I ignored.(Of course, the truth is that most games are a bit of both. Some complexities can be ignored without leaving a hole, but others can't. So, it might be more accurate to say I wouldn't mind a game in which most complexities can be ignored without leaving holes.)(Again, I'm addressing the theme more than the specific quote...)All the Gygax quotes about 3e I remember reading in 2000, he never seemed to say a bad thing about it. I don't think it had anything to do with him wanting to sell us on the game. It was just because he is a gentleman &amp; thought ragging on it as it was just getting off the ground was not a nice thing to do.When you work in a company of more than one person, not everyone can agree with every decision. No one can really see the future &amp; absolutely know what the best decision is. So, you have ways to make decisions &amp; then (ideally) everyone lines up behind it &amp; does everything they can to make the decision that was made be the right one. Not because you're being dishonest, but because you're humble enough to realize that you might have been wrong. That the other guy's idea may actually be the better one. And, because you know that you succeed or fail as a company, not as individuals.But...I'm not sure what my point is...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="RFisher, post: 3714014, member: 3608"] On the "just ignore extra complexity" theme: I've played games that labelled a lot of stuff as optional/advanced. But then when you pointed out a difficulty with the game, the answer was "this advanced rule fixes that". The game pretended to be modular, but it really wasn't. Ignoring the advanced rules meant you had an incomplete game rather than a lighter version of the game. I don't mind a complex game that is modular so that I can ignore the complexities without having to manually patch the hole left by what I ignored. (Of course, the truth is that most games are a bit of both. Some complexities can be ignored without leaving a hole, but others can't. So, it might be more accurate to say I wouldn't mind a game in which most complexities can be ignored without leaving holes.) (Again, I'm addressing the theme more than the specific quote...) All the Gygax quotes about 3e I remember reading in 2000, he never seemed to say a bad thing about it. I don't think it had anything to do with him wanting to sell us on the game. It was just because he is a gentleman & thought ragging on it as it was just getting off the ground was not a nice thing to do. When you work in a company of more than one person, not everyone can agree with every decision. No one can really see the future & absolutely know what the best decision is. So, you have ways to make decisions & then (ideally) everyone lines up behind it & does everything they can to make the decision that was made [i]be[/i] the right one. Not because you're being dishonest, but because you're humble enough to realize that you might have been wrong. That the other guy's idea may actually be the better one. And, because you know that you succeed or fail as a company, not as individuals. But...I'm not sure what my point is... [/QUOTE]

Verification