Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="El Mahdi" data-source="post: 4523869" data-attributes="member: 59506">I agree that all that really matters is whether they went far enough for the game to be economically successful, and the answer is yes.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;However, that's just too boring<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&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />, so -&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;I think they went too far, and, didn't go far enough.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue&nbsp; &nbsp; :p"&nbsp; data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />&nbsp;&nbsp;I agree we don't have a WoTC design document to judge exactly what they were shooting for, so I'll just go with what they released of their goals.&nbsp;I feel they started with feedback concerning problems customers and fans had with the current edition of the time, 3.5E.&nbsp; They came up with goals and concepts to fix those perceived problems, many of which were playtested in some 3.5 products (Bo9S), others tried out in a related system (Star Wars SAGA), and others revealed in Races and Classes and Worlds and Monsters.&nbsp; All of which made me really excited about the direction they might be taking the game.&nbsp;But then, instead of taking 3E and applying their changes and fixes, they completely stripped the system down to it's bare bones (going too far) and started over making an entirely new game.&nbsp; Their efforts to make the new game (IMO) fell short (didn't go far enough).&nbsp; They made a good, simple, fast, and easy game (the just right part), but didn't do enough to provide ample complexity and variety to facilitate things previous editions could (the not far enough).&nbsp;Of course, for a lot of people, 4E hits the sweet spot.&nbsp; So, I think the question is completely subjective from person to person.&nbsp; In the end, I think they went just as far as they needed to go to make it successful and fun.&nbsp; And that may be all that really matters.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="El Mahdi, post: 4523869, member: 59506"] I agree that all that really matters is whether they went far enough for the game to be economically successful, and the answer is yes. However, that's just too boring;), so - I think they went too far, [B][I][U]and[/U][/I][/B], didn't go far enough.:p I agree we don't have a WoTC design document to judge exactly what they were shooting for, so I'll just go with what they released of their goals. I feel they started with feedback concerning problems customers and fans had with the current edition of the time, 3.5E. They came up with goals and concepts to fix those perceived problems, many of which were playtested in some 3.5 products (Bo9S), others tried out in a related system (Star Wars SAGA), and others revealed in [I]Races and Classes[/I] and [I]Worlds and Monsters[/I]. All of which made me really excited about the direction they might be taking the game. But then, instead of taking 3E and applying their changes and fixes, they completely stripped the system down to it's bare bones (going too far) and started over making an entirely new game. Their efforts to make the new game (IMO) fell short (didn't go far enough). They made a good, simple, fast, and easy game (the just right part), but didn't do enough to provide ample complexity and variety to facilitate things previous editions could (the not far enough). Of course, for a lot of people, 4E hits the sweet spot. So, I think the question is completely subjective from person to person. In the end, I think they went just as far as they needed to go to make it successful and fun. And that may be all that really matters. [/QUOTE]

Verification