D&D General 6E But A + Thread

[Scribe]

What's your reason for this?

I cannot speak for Micah, but I believe that when Wizards does things in a 'modular' manner, they are not fully integrated into a cohesive system.

Optional rules are also very often the first ones forgotten, dismissed by certain DMs, and just add clutter/confusion to the table.

 

[kermit4karate]

Can you provide an example when this was true?

Or how about The Beatles? (Or, any of a number of the most widely recognized popular bands, songs, movies, etc.)

If one were to say, "Well, they put everything into the music, which is why they were also commercially uber-successful," that wouldn't be completely true, right? They could have just stayed in Liverpool playing in pubs.

 

[Micah Sweet]

What's your reason for this?

I believe that a more coherent, focused game that truly hones in to what customers want out of it will ultimately lead to more commercial success, while also allowing the designers to design what they want the game to be, leading to (again, IMO) better design. So decide the game you want to make (by whatever metric works for the money people), maker sure your design team all want to make that game, and do everything in your power to bring that game to reality.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Me at my job every day? I always want to do the best possible job. I also recognize that I have to work within parameters and constraints set by my employer, because I'm not the only person involved.

I think this applies to a great many things in life. People must often come to terms with seemingly competing objectives, and when these seemingly competing objectives are simultaneously met, that's when the real magic happens.

Read my reply above. I think real effort should be put into making sure the creatives and the money folk are on the same page as much as possible.

 

[dave2008]

Are you sure? Do you really think the design team's guiding creative light is, "whatever the most people will pay for"?

That is changing the goal post a bit. You said previously: "...since they're always chasing what they think the most potential customers want, more than they're trying to make the best game they can."

It is possible that what most customers want is also the best game or at least fairly close. Your assuming that mass appeal and good design can't work together. I think that is a flawed assumption. Your initial quote said nothing about the designers creative light (whatever that is). If that was your intent, it was not clear.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It may not have been your intent, but it can definitely be perceived as gate keeping.

I mean who is to say what is a realistic option for the owners of the game.

We could ask them.

 

[kermit4karate]

I believe that a more coherent, focused game that truly hones in to what customers want out of it will ultimately lead to more commercial success, while also allowing the designers to design what they want the game to be, leading to (again, IMO) better design. So decide the game you want to make (by whatever metric works for the money people), maker sure your design team all want to make that game, and do everything in your power to bring that game to reality.

Micah, I'm going to say something and I don't want you to take it the wrong way.... Are you a little upset with Hasbro?

Sorry. I know, I'm sorry. It's OK. I'm upset with everything all the time so I get it.

 

[AnotherGuy]

I believe that a more coherent, focused game that truly hones in to what customers want out of it will ultimately lead to more commercial success, while also allowing the designers to design what they want the game to be, leading to (again, IMO) better design. So decide the game you want to make (by whatever metric works for the money people), maker sure your design team all want to make that game, and do everything in your power to bring that game to reality.

Do you feel 5e failed in this? And if yes how? Since they did not create a modular game.

 

[Reynard]

5e was advertised as having options that are modular.
Maybe I'm over speaking but what you're witnessing, I believe, is much of that.

I think the modular design space for 5e is largely unexplored and there were plenty of ideas from earlier editions that could use a polish.

I agree that a 6E should also have built in explicit modularity, with dials for low and high fantasy, heroism and horror, and so on.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That is changing the goal post a bit. You said previously: "...since they're always chasing what they think the most potential customers want, more than they're trying to make the best game they can."

It is possible that what most customers want is also the best game or at least fairly close. Your assuming that mass appeal and good design can work together. I think that is a flawed assumption. Your initial quote said nothing about the designers creative light (whatever that is). If that was your intent, it was not clear.

I was assuming that good design and creative light can go together, not that mass appeal and good design can.