Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9371220" data-attributes="member: 6790260">I know! Imagine that! It's almost like listening to fan preferences is only one, albeit important, source of design concepts, and that allowing popularity to drive all design choices is in fact at least as bad as never listening to anything fans want.There's a difference between, "You should contribute the things we can't," and "eh, figure it out yourself." Hacking rules you need that are genuinely growing beyond what the basic rules do is great, and should be supported. Hacking the basic, fundamental stuff...not so much. You shouldn't have to be a designer to make a basic combat encounter that isn't going to splatter the party or get splattered in two dull rounds.Okay, but you do realize that that's just as much a hostile, unfair caricature as "oh, so you're just having to completely design your own game from scratch every time", right?The game can be made so that its core is actually functional by itself, AND still open to customization and alteration. You don't need a poorly-built core in order to support individual game design extension; indeed, I would think exactly the reverse is true, where a well-built core makes customization easier.</blockquote>