From the WotC Boards: Mearls on 'Aggro'

[D.Shaffer]

There's concern over how much from WoW (MMOGs in general) that *did* make it into the redesign, for no reason other than it's profitable-trendy.

And to branch off on that...I have no problems with any part of a MMO game making it into DND so long as it works. To add on to my previous statement, I also dont under why the fact something might have appeared in a video game first means it should be locked in a box and never be considered at all.

 

[Driddle]

List please?

I said "concern." If we had an actual list of the MMO(RP)G adaptations already embraced, this thread would be much, much, MUCH longer.

 

[Maggan]

I said "concern." If we had an actual list of the MMO(RP)G adaptations already embraced, this thread would be much, much, MUCH longer.

So in other words all this "concern" is much ado about absolutely nothing at all.

/M

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

There's concern over how much from WoW (MMOGs in general) that *did* make it into the redesign, for no reason other than it's profitable-trendy.

What creates this concern?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Announcing it makes you appear petulant. Taking the "high road" requires silence and stealth ... like a ninja -- no one should even know the deed has been done.

I guess he is not trying to take the high road, but ensure that he no longer feels forced to reacts to posts that create negative emotions (anger, hatred, disappointment?) in him. And that the ignored one no longer tries to post something directed at him, since he will miss it anyway.

 

[Driddle]

All this "concern" is much ado about absolutely nothing at all.

What creates this concern?

The unknown. Drives most of the questions that show up on this board. You hadn't noticed? When people don't know something for certain, they become concerned, ask questions and second-guess the outcomes. Basic human behavior.

And we won't know if those concerns will be borne out until after the fact. ... So it's just as silly to assume everything's fine (ala "much ado about nothing") as it is to be worried.

In the meantime, we discuss.

 

[Maggan]

So it's just as silly to assume everything's fine (ala "much ado about nothing") as it is to be worried.

"There is noting to fear but fear itself." - Franklin D. Roosevelt

I'll chose to be silly and assume everything is alright. It's such an enormous waste of energy to go for another eight or so months worrying about something that very likely won't be a problem.

So I chose not to be worried. Try it, it's quite liberating.

/M

 

[Driddle]

I'll chose to be silly ... Try it, it's quite liberating.

Mmmmm-yeah. We'll take that under consideration.

... But while we get distracted on the value of blind trust and valid market feedback about stupid mistakes, WORLD OF WARCRAFT IS TAKING OVER OUR HOBBY!!!

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

The unknown. Drives most of the questions that show up on this board. You hadn't noticed? When people don't know something for certain, they become concerned, ask questions and second-guess the outcomes. Basic human behavior.

And we won't know if those concerns will be borne out until after the fact. ... So it's just as silly to assume everything's fine (ala "much ado about nothing") as it is to be worried.

In the meantime, we discuss.

What I am missing in many cases is a balanced perspective.

Yes, there are some design aspects we don't know much about. We have some concerns.
A balanced perspective would be to present this concern, describe how it is arrived, in a reasonable manner, and asking wether other interpretations are possible.

If a mechanic is described that could lead to a negative/undesired effect depending on the implementation, why automatically assume that the mechanic will work exactly in this negative/undesired way? Why assume that the designers didn't notice it (while at the same time pretty obvious for the poster) and did not create an implementation that addresses the concern?
That doesn't mean it's unneccessariy or ill-advised to inquire about it.
Variant 1:
"Mechanic X is ripped off of WoW and that totally sucks because it always leads to Y and Z", Variant 2:
"Mechanic X looks similar to a mechanic from WoW. I wonder if the designer considered the negative side effect Y and Z and how they addressed it. Especially Y would probably hurt in D&D, and I have no idea yet how they can do X without it. Any thoughts?"

Variant 2 reads a lot more interesting and more importantly, a lot less aggressive. (There are no guarantees that all responses remain inaggressive, but you can't really account for the behaviour of other posters, only for your own, and trying to set a good example.)

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Remember that there is no reason for there to be only two camps. There could be dozens, each with its own point of view.

Nah, that was just a belief found one or two decades after the end of the Cold War. I think we're over it today and back to the old "Black & White" "If you're not with us, you're against us" paradigm. It's really easier that way. (I hear they will remove the yellow traffic light soon, too)