Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 5780512" data-attributes="member: 2067">You think?I guess I'm more optimistic. Since D&amp;D modules have always required some &quot;adapting&quot; to your own home games, the process of weeding out certain rules assumptions and putting back in your own rules assumptions (all the while with clear guidelines on how this affects the module) isn't any different from what anyone else does on a regular basis. I think this also lets WotC simply re-publish (or gently update) some old modules. Against the Giants adventure boxed set coming December 2013, and suchlike.I have trouble taking seriously those who think that they get to tell me that my fun isn't good enough, for those people that aren't happy enough just doing what they want to do, but also want to make sure I am not doing what I want to do. That's petty and vindictive. That's somewhat human nature, but I think I'm optimistic about that, too: I don't think a significant number of D&amp;D players will resent other people doing what they want, as long as they get to do what they want. I also think it's possible to have more than one cohesive structure for the game. You don't need ever-existing published lines for everything, but if what you do is re-release the AD&amp;D 1e rules with a new cover and some new organization and verbiage, then production is cheap, the market exists, you can do a smallish print run, and call it good. You can then generate extra material for the rules modules that are selling particularly well, if you'd like to capitalize on their success, while letting the less-popular ones be more reactive.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 5780512, member: 2067"] You think? I guess I'm more optimistic. Since D&D modules have always required some "adapting" to your own home games, the process of weeding out certain rules assumptions and putting back in your own rules assumptions (all the while with clear guidelines on how this affects the module) isn't any different from what anyone else does on a regular basis. I think this also lets WotC simply re-publish (or gently update) some old modules. [I]Against the Giants[/I] adventure boxed set coming December 2013, and suchlike. I have trouble taking seriously those who think that they get to tell me that my fun isn't good enough, for those people that aren't happy enough just doing what [I]they want to do[/I], but also want to make sure I [I]am not doing what I want to do[/I]. That's petty and vindictive. That's somewhat human nature, but I think I'm optimistic about that, too: I don't think a significant number of D&D players will resent other people doing what they want, as long as they get to do what they want. I also think it's possible to have more than one cohesive structure for the game. You don't need ever-existing published lines for everything, but if what you do is re-release the AD&D 1e rules with a new cover and some new organization and verbiage, then production is cheap, the market exists, you can do a smallish print run, and call it good. You can then generate extra material for the rules modules that are selling particularly well, if you'd like to capitalize on their success, while letting the less-popular ones be more reactive. [/QUOTE]

Verification