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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Windjammer" data-source="post: 5640918" data-attributes="member: 60075">Ehm, frankly, no. After three years of 4E where the design crew (or what's left of it) has consistently failed to fix the game's major flaws - not to mention that the initial release fell a long way short from all the design goals we were promised in the preview booklets - I don't think the extant or prospective D&D community needs another grandiose attempt at an ambitious design. What we need is some actual effort producing some actual results which are gameable, and which can give us what D&D was always best at: a solid chassis on which to peg one's own campaigns. What we need is less hype, less spin, less Legends & Lore articles which go nowhere and are never once followed up by an ever so tiny houserule people can actually implement in their games. No, we need just plain solid design. A hard look at what boardgames do right would do well for RPG 'professionals' to finally catch up with an inkling of how games get professionally developed. As in, the final pages in <a href="http://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/6609/error/expired/sor-playbook-pdf" target="_blank">this PDF</a> (excerpts quoted more accessibly <a href="http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=440342&postcount=141" target="_blank">here</a>),  which makes a good case on the analogy of game to software development. Guess what. None of that happened to 4E design. 4E design  was NEVER exposed to rigorous design, rigorous development, and rigorous  playtesting. How do we know that? We know that because of the extensive  errating the company had to undergo. Skill challenges, monster damage  output, characters' to-hit bonuses... the most basic numbers in the  game, you name them, they are all wrong, front to back.Or, as this great gentleman put it upthread,</blockquote>

Verification