Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Frustrated with Next
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6033346" data-attributes="member: 6696971"><p>@<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/members/fjw70.html" target="_blank">fjw70</a></p><p></p><p>Let me confirm that this is your suggestion. We:</p><p></p><p>A - All (disconnected) groups fill in their own "rulings" where the "rules" are absent or silent.</p><p></p><p>B - All (disconnected) groups interpret opaque/nebulous rules (Boots of Elvenkind and the Listen/Move Silently contest on Stealth-adversarial (almost all of it) terrain) by way of their own (disconnected) intuition/reasoning/experience.</p><p></p><p>C - All (disconnected) groups create (or use pre-existing from other systems or their own houserules) their own hazards, traps, and non-combat (Social and Exploration) conflict resolution mechanics and insert them into the playtest material.</p><p></p><p>D - All (disconnected) groups add their own tactical depth and/or upgrades to monsters so they are less vanilla and underwhelming and more competitive and tactically interesting.</p><p></p><p>E - Some (it most certainly won't be uniform) groups use the small (which is specific to each topic in the survey) narrative area to attempt to convey (with extreme brevity) to the developers each of their unique versions of A - D.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I also want to confirm how you believe that these narrative portions of surveys (thousands and thousands of them) are parsed:</p><p></p><p>1 - A single developer reads each of them word-for-word to maintain internal consistency and coherency within the devs understanding of the "voice of the people".</p><p></p><p>2 - Multiple developers read each of them word-for-word.</p><p></p><p>3 - A single intern reads each of them word-for-word and composes a second hand report to provide to the devs in an effort to hopefully represent the "voice of the people". </p><p></p><p>4 - Multiple interns read a large sum of narratives and compose their own second hand briefs.</p><p></p><p>5 - A keyword/data filter sniffs out specific words and phrases and collates numbers based on the aggregate sum of these keywords/phrases.</p><p></p><p>6 - Some unknown percentage of the narratives get read by various people and the devs kinda/sorta round-table this to try to get a "feel" for the "voice of the people" and a large percentage of them get lost in the extreme workload/coffee breaks/blog reading/horsing around of the office.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Is the top one correct and which of the bottom 6 do you consider most likely? Take that equation and eyeball for me your odds that we then get a coherent product.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 6033346, member: 6696971"] @[URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/members/fjw70.html"]fjw70[/URL] Let me confirm that this is your suggestion. We: A - All (disconnected) groups fill in their own "rulings" where the "rules" are absent or silent. B - All (disconnected) groups interpret opaque/nebulous rules (Boots of Elvenkind and the Listen/Move Silently contest on Stealth-adversarial (almost all of it) terrain) by way of their own (disconnected) intuition/reasoning/experience. C - All (disconnected) groups create (or use pre-existing from other systems or their own houserules) their own hazards, traps, and non-combat (Social and Exploration) conflict resolution mechanics and insert them into the playtest material. D - All (disconnected) groups add their own tactical depth and/or upgrades to monsters so they are less vanilla and underwhelming and more competitive and tactically interesting. E - Some (it most certainly won't be uniform) groups use the small (which is specific to each topic in the survey) narrative area to attempt to convey (with extreme brevity) to the developers each of their unique versions of A - D. I also want to confirm how you believe that these narrative portions of surveys (thousands and thousands of them) are parsed: 1 - A single developer reads each of them word-for-word to maintain internal consistency and coherency within the devs understanding of the "voice of the people". 2 - Multiple developers read each of them word-for-word. 3 - A single intern reads each of them word-for-word and composes a second hand report to provide to the devs in an effort to hopefully represent the "voice of the people". 4 - Multiple interns read a large sum of narratives and compose their own second hand briefs. 5 - A keyword/data filter sniffs out specific words and phrases and collates numbers based on the aggregate sum of these keywords/phrases. 6 - Some unknown percentage of the narratives get read by various people and the devs kinda/sorta round-table this to try to get a "feel" for the "voice of the people" and a large percentage of them get lost in the extreme workload/coffee breaks/blog reading/horsing around of the office. Is the top one correct and which of the bottom 6 do you consider most likely? Take that equation and eyeball for me your odds that we then get a coherent product. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Frustrated with Next
Top