Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Desdichado" data-source="post: 302766" data-attributes="member: 2205">I've already admitted my rationale isn't empirical.&nbsp; And since I'm not submitting this as a thesis for peer review in an academic journal, I think that's fine.And I'm not questioning Mr. Dancey's honesty or his competence.&nbsp; Merely his interpretation of the data, which, of course, we outsiders don't have much info on.&nbsp; I don't believe my assumptions or &quot;conclusions&quot; if you want to call them that, are inconsistent with the data that he's shared with us so far.&nbsp; For example, he called the non-D&amp;D portion of gamers insignificant.&nbsp; I certainly wouldn't call 40% insignificant (going on numbers you posted: I actually wouldn't have guessed it'd be that high.)&nbsp; But if, for whatever reason relative to his sales goals that is insignificant, then his strategy is fine.&nbsp; Of course, just because they add that kinda stuff doesn't mean they're going to get all GURPS/Storyteller/Other players to jump right on board, but when making an effort to reach out to them is so easy, ignoring them doesn't make sense to me.Nor do I feel like what I advocated should have been seen by the D&amp;D community as any kind of &quot;attack&quot; on the system, or call for changes.&nbsp; Therefore, the extremely defensive reaction I've recieved somewhat surprised me.&nbsp; All I'd like are more options, because I believe that a lot of gamers would use them, including many that still shy away from D&amp;D because of the system structural issues.&nbsp; When asked where they could have fit in the DMG, I opined that the very long section on dungeon environments is likely very little-used, because those details aren't really relevant for most campaigns (and if they are, they're still more trouble than they're worth to actually use.)I think that it's a rather unfortunate myopic trend amongst D&amp;Ders to think that there aren't quite a few people who left the system because they didn't like it, or that they're buying capacity in the marketplace is insubstantial.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Desdichado, post: 302766, member: 2205"] [color=white]I've already admitted my rationale isn't empirical. And since I'm not submitting this as a thesis for peer review in an academic journal, I think that's fine. And I'm not questioning Mr. Dancey's honesty or his competence. Merely his interpretation of the data, which, of course, we outsiders don't have [i]much[/i] info on. I don't believe my assumptions or "conclusions" if you want to call them that, are inconsistent with the data that he's shared with us so far. For example, he called the non-D&D portion of gamers insignificant. I certainly wouldn't call 40% insignificant (going on numbers you posted: I actually wouldn't have guessed it'd be that high.) But if, for whatever reason relative to his sales goals that [i]is[/i] insignificant, then his strategy is fine. Of course, just because they add that kinda stuff doesn't mean they're going to get all GURPS/Storyteller/Other players to jump right on board, but when making an effort to reach out to them is so easy, ignoring them doesn't make sense to me. Nor do I feel like what I advocated should have been seen by the D&D community as any kind of "attack" on the system, or call for changes. Therefore, the extremely defensive reaction I've recieved somewhat surprised me. All I'd like are more options, because I believe that a lot of gamers would use them, including many that still shy away from D&D because of the system structural issues. When asked where they could have fit in the DMG, I opined that the very long section on dungeon environments is likely very little-used, because those details aren't really relevant for most campaigns (and if they are, they're still more trouble than they're worth to actually use.) I think that it's a rather unfortunate myopic trend amongst D&Ders to think that there aren't quite a few people who left the system because they didn't like it, or that they're buying capacity in the marketplace is insubstantial. [/color] [/QUOTE]

Verification