Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 4145914" data-attributes="member: 710">My assumption is that there are enough designers out there that would have been interested in playtesting. But WotC needs a wider base of people testing their system, not just designers. Designers have probably a different perspective on a game, and their professional attitude to it can affect what they will focus on. They might even have a habit of reporting things differently, or, being the tinkerers they are, give feedback that is inappropriate (instead of critisizing or highlighting stuff, they might want to change rules. Which increases the workload on going through the feedback...) In the end, there needed to be some diversification in the group of testers. (Though I wonder if it's enough, considering that many playtesters were recruited from the RPGA)And there was off course a limit of the number of playtest groups to take. Maybe they made a tombola, and some of the designers on their large list of possible playtesters got picked, but many didn't. Or they had actual preferences. "The blood-sucking mouse offered very good insights on topic X of book Y. We might want someone like him in the tests." Or it wasn't any intention, and Ari got his place just because he was in a (RPGA?) group that applied for it...Off course, with more resources, more time, and if wishes where horses, I wouldn't mind more playtesters, and also more designers in the mix. (though, what's with the saying of "too many cooks..."?What I don't get yet is why they haven't gotten more information by now, if they are actually approached to work again for WotC. I am really at loss what is happening their at WotC at the moment. Whoever is responsible for it, I hope he knows what he is doing, and I hope in the end, the final decision will also be positive for players and potential 3rd-party publishers. But I am really no longer as optimistic as Orcus is. (But can anyone be? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> ) It's sad. I love basically everything about 4E, but this part might become a weakness. Not that it would stop me getting 4E, but still...I think WotC "trick" in marketing is using "media" like EnWorld doing the job. All information we have on 4E came from WotC. But it was the community of D&D fans that assembled it into stuff like the PHB 4E light, and that is really an amazing thing. But why do we assume that WotC didn't expect something like this too happen, and counting on it? It is a kind of "Viral Marketing". Expose some small tidbits, and the fans will go all over it, organize, analyze, critisize and fantasize about it. All this increases our personal investment in 4E, because we "worked hard" to assemble all the information we liked. Off course, some of us might now believe WotC is stupid or incompetent for releasing so little information, but the truth is, they are just doing it in a way to make us even more interested. Off course, this strategy doesn't work for everyone. But I think on some level, it works for all the people that still post here (even those that don't like everything - or anything - they see) more then we like to admit. There might be a time - and more importantly, a "focus group" (like not-yet-roleplayers) - on which this strategy doesn't work. I suppose we will see something more in the future (The Rouse implied as much, though I would have expected to see something of it by now...), but I wouldn't count on it giving us more information - they will just be using different channels...You accomplished to have people read something and thought about something. You can't really hope for more, I guess. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification