Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 9223108" data-attributes="member: 7023840">Yep. I might not have put it exactly like that, but you're not wrong.This thread was (ostensibly) about the recent revelations regarding the design process of 4e that were revealed. And how some of them were new, and some of them corroborated things we already knew.For example, I had previously written an abbreviated history that detailed, inter alia, that people were aware that 4e was going to be divisive, and that this was so obvious that when Paizo went to playtest it, it gave them the confidence to pursue PF.However, I didn't know that people on the design team were trying to raise the alarm unsuccessfully.While thread drift is certainly a thing, and people can talk about what they want to, it does seem weird for people to come in to this thread in particular and lecture everyone about how they didn't get 4e, and it was actually perfect.Okay, not weird. Completely predictable. But still.(And I will reiterate that I think that 4e was a well-designed game, and that I am glad it happened, but I also think that it should be possible to have rationale conversations about the ways in which it didn't work for the target market without rehashing old debates that are no longer relevant.)</blockquote>