Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="rounser" data-source="post: 3925344" data-attributes="member: 1106">Reality Check Time: The designers are all &quot;grognards&quot;, aren't they? Therein lies the answer to your question - the distinction is somewhat artificial.&nbsp; It's just one small set of grognards (with game design expertise that seems primarily crunch-focused, given many examples of flavour-as-afterthought) with their preferred direction, perhaps informed by surveys (but interpreting them is so easily skewed to inherent biases that I'd take the idea of them being impartial - or their data correct given that what people say in surveys is a different thing to what they do - with one huge grain of salt).&nbsp; And like all grognards - nay, all people - they can get it wrong, both in terms of bringing new people to the game and humouring the established fans of the game.&nbsp; I'm not suggesting that they should listen to teeming hordes of whinging grognards, but given that writers committees also seem to be a terrible forum for getting a good result (see Hollywood scriptwriting teams) it's probably unwise to lay all the blame at the feet of longtime fans of D&amp;D for being the only ones being wrongheaded...and wishful thinking to suggest that the designers have produced something flawless.There's a certainty that some of the new directions for 4E will be recanted for 5E, just as some 3E directions seem to have been for 4E.&nbsp; Heck - it's even possible that thousands of minds might come up with some things that just a handful of experts hadn't even considered.&nbsp; But it's easier to dismiss an entire set of gamers as irrelevant and suffering from &quot;cognitive dissonance&quot; or fear of change, and call it a day...like in this thread?And that said, I really like most of what I've heard about 4E, and have great faith in the designer's ability to model a great game.&nbsp; I'm circumspect about seeing eye-to-eye with them on &quot;core flavour&quot;, though.&nbsp; Oh well.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="rounser, post: 3925344, member: 1106"] Reality Check Time: The designers are all "grognards", aren't they? Therein lies the answer to your question - the distinction is somewhat artificial. It's just one small set of grognards (with game design expertise that seems primarily crunch-focused, given many examples of flavour-as-afterthought) with their preferred direction, perhaps informed by surveys (but interpreting them is so easily skewed to inherent biases that I'd take the idea of them being impartial - or their data correct given that what people say in surveys is a different thing to what they do - with one huge grain of salt). And like all grognards - nay, all people - they can get it wrong, both in terms of bringing new people to the game and humouring the established fans of the game. I'm not suggesting that they should listen to teeming hordes of whinging grognards, but given that writers committees also seem to be a terrible forum for getting a good result (see Hollywood scriptwriting teams) it's probably unwise to lay all the blame at the feet of longtime fans of D&D for being the only ones being wrongheaded...and wishful thinking to suggest that the designers have produced something flawless. There's a certainty that some of the new directions for 4E will be recanted for 5E, just as some 3E directions seem to have been for 4E. Heck - it's even possible that thousands of minds might come up with some things that just a handful of experts hadn't even considered. But it's easier to dismiss an entire set of gamers as irrelevant and suffering from "cognitive dissonance" or fear of change, and call it a day...like in this thread? And that said, I really like most of what I've heard about 4E, and have great faith in the designer's ability to model a great game. I'm circumspect about seeing eye-to-eye with them on "core flavour", though. Oh well. [/QUOTE]

Verification