D&D General Kobold Press Going Down a Dark Road

[mamba]

But you were quite comfortable saying it had no good reason without having any of that data.

I was stating my opinion, did not realize I have to point that out in every post… as far as I am concerned you can safely assume that everything I write is personal opinion unless I reference something.

Seems a safe bet with everyone actually, so I have no idea why you try to pull this nonsense

You were, 100%, making an argument about what was good for the game completely irrespective of popularity.

no I have not, at no point did I say it would be better / good for the game. I said I would not keep subclass compatibility if it were up to me and that there is no good reason to keep it, which is my opinion, no more, no less. I even said it is my opinion

To me all this does is restrict the design for no good reason

Also, this in itself is not making the game anything (better / same / worse), it only allows for more freedom in the design. That is all I said and all I meant. How that gets used and how it is then being received in the playtest is not addressed by this at all.

You are misrepresenting what I wrote and that you continue doing so after I already pointed it out to you twice is asinine

You are literally doing the thing you just said I was completely unjustified in doing--tot he point that you claimed to find it mystifying, even outright incomprehensible.

learn to read, I did the exact opposite of what you claim in the original post and in my replies

I am not aware of anyone asking whether 1DD should be compatible to the point of allowing 5e subclasses, would be interesting to know the answer to that though. I know what mine is

If 60% of the players prefer it, then there is a good reason for it, if only 10% do there is not, see how that works?

If your only argument is to misrepresent me, then we are done here. Troll someone else. As far as I am concerned you are deliberately lying

 

[EzekielRaiden]

If your only argument is to misrepresent me, then we are done here.

Given you've repeatedly done that to me, I can't say I feel much sympathy.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Mod Note:

People, this thread is generating an unusual number of reports, mostly for how people are treating each other. Can we please tone down the pointed responses?

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Really? They ask an awful lot of questions in those surveys.

Yes, but they would ask more and different questions if it was all about popularity. They leave a lot off the table. For example, they never asked (IIRC): “do you like psionics?” They often ask if the implementation of something is satisfactory, but not if we like that thing in the first place.

 

[mamba]

Given you've repeatedly done that to me, I can't say I feel much sympathy.

where have I done that?

 

[dave2008]

Oh no denying metaplot also sales. That was what sustained the WoD after all. Metaplot isn’t fluff though. That’s why I mentioned Silver Munches. Well it isn’t fluff as regards the comparison I’m making.

I don't know what Silver Munches is, but meta-plot is 100% fluff. That is why it can be complete ignored.

 

[dave2008]

Really? They ask an awful lot of questions in those surveys.

Yes, really. @Uni-the-Unicorn! hit on one subject, psionics, but that is just the tip of the iceberg really. I will give another example: weapon feats. There was a weapon feats UA that never made it into a product. In the survey for those feats they never asked if we liked/disliked the concept/idea of weapon feats. They only asked about the specific implementation. If you want to know if something is popular - you need to ask the question. They didn't. This happens all the time in UA and the follow up surveys.

 

[Oofta]

And from my position, your claim seems to come back to "well right now I just so happen to be getting the game I like, so popularity is the best thing ever." It's an incredibly self-serving standard.

There are plenty of things that I would consider decent quality that I don't personally care for. Take the movie Snowpiercer for example. A lot of people thought it was a great movie, I didn't. I don't go on forums dedicated to the movie and tell people how it was a low quality movie because it's not true. The the acting and effects that supported it were high quality. The fact that the movie just didn't work for me didn't make it low quality, it just means it wasn't the movie for me.

It's fine if you don't care for the game. But every time people assert that D&D 5E is low quality they're also implying that people like me and everyone I play with who enjoy the game are just too stupid or willfully ignorant to know better.

Nothing's perfect and no game is going to work for everyone. I've never said there aren't other quality games out there, even many that simply never became popular. On the other hand saying that just because I, and millions of other people, think 5E is decent quality it's somehow self serving and short sighted is just plain insulting.

I accept that something can be a quality product even if I don't care for it. I simply respect that other people value different things. I don't think respecting other people's preferences, even when I disagree, is all that hard.

 

[teitan]

I don't know what Silver Munches is, but meta-plot is 100% fluff. That is why it can be complete ignored.

Then you are commenting without understanding my direct reference. Bards Rumors check the link and then get back to me for what I was addressing in fluff vs crunch and the difference between metaplot and fluff. Thanks.

 

[dave2008]

Then you are commenting without understanding my direct reference. Bards Rumors check the link and then get back to me for what I was addressing in fluff vs crunch and the difference between metaplot and fluff. Thanks.

I clicked on your link, read the opening paragraph, and then realized this is stupid - I never wanted to discuss fluff vs crunch or meta-plot. This line of discussion was about this comment of yours:

Turning ASI only into a feat is not a fix. It is a complication and a patch that was unnecessary. It was a needless change. 100% unnecessary except to sell books. Done. End of story. You might like it but it doesn’t make me wrong nor does it make you right.

I disagreed with it and you failed to convince me. Then went off on a fluff vs crunch and meta-plot tangent. I don't desire to discuss fluff/crunch/meta-lot so I apologize for playing into that. I also no longer desire to discuss feats and their relevance to selling books with you. I am confident neither of us are correct.