Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 8060391" data-attributes="member: 12731">Of course.I mean, of course - if the process is the same, nothing's changed! [emoji14]What I mean is that perhaps the most important job of the dev team is to ensure each change really works towards the (as of yet not) stated design goals. If a change is merely &quot;neat&quot;, it probably shouldn't be included.There's a lot of suggestions. The project can only include so many before the end product becomes something else than recognizably 5th edition, only crunchier.So each one needs to be carefully weighed against the cumulative risk of the end project coming across as just another D&amp;D clone, instead of something still clearly recognizable as 5th edition.It is in that context, I'm saying if it isn't broken, don't fix it.In other words, don't include something just 'cause you think it's better. Is it so much better it justifies deviating from 5E?I believe that in nearly all cases the answer is &quot;questionable&quot; at best. Of course, the team still needs to select some changes, or there's no product.Just be aware that each one has a clear cost. Even a seemingly small change can cumulatively cause the community to go &quot;meh, it's good, but it no longer feels like 5E&quot; which, given what we know of the goals, would make it a failure.Tldr don't change the damage of a short sword (or whatever) just because. Only change what absolutely needs to change to meet the project's goals.I would say losing sight of this is by far the biggest risk with a project such as this.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CapnZapp, post: 8060391, member: 12731"] Of course. I mean, [I]of course[/I] - if the process is the same, nothing's changed! [emoji14] What I mean is that perhaps the most important job of the dev team is to ensure each change really works towards the (as of yet not) stated design goals. If a change is merely "neat", it probably shouldn't be included. There's a lot of suggestions. The project can only include so many before the end product becomes something else than recognizably 5th edition, only crunchier. So each one needs to be carefully weighed against the cumulative risk of the end project coming across as just another D&D clone, instead of something still clearly recognizable as 5th edition. It is in that context, I'm saying if it isn't broken, don't fix it. In other words, don't include something just 'cause you think it's better. [b]Is it [I]so much better[/I] it justifies deviating from 5E?[/b] I believe that in nearly all cases the answer is "questionable" at best. Of course, the team still needs to select some changes, or there's no product. Just be aware that each one has a clear cost. Even a seemingly small change can cumulatively cause the community to go "meh, it's good, but it no longer feels like 5E" which, given what we know of the goals, would make it a failure. Tldr don't change the damage of a short sword (or whatever) just because. Only change what absolutely needs to change to meet the project's goals. I would say losing sight of this is by far the biggest risk with a project such as this. [/QUOTE]

Verification