Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="D'karr" data-source="post: 3145841" data-attributes="member: 336">I do believe that tradition is worth much more than good design.&nbsp; The fact that we have a Third Edition of the &quot;World's Most Popular Roleplaying Game&quot; is not because of good design, even though Third Edition is much better designed than previous editions.&nbsp; It is because the game's traditions, those iconic concepts, captured the imagination of millions of players, way before Third Edition was even a glimmer in Peter Adkison's eye.&nbsp; ALL that happened even with the &quot;poor&quot; design, some might even say in spite of it.&nbsp; Third Edition is/was so successful because it provided those same traditions and a more consistent and better designed way to deliver those traditions.&nbsp; It didn't discard the traditions for the sake of efficiency or &quot;better&quot; design.Monsters that were &quot;scary&quot; in previous editions were still &quot;scary&quot; in 3e.&nbsp; Some even got &quot;scarier.&quot;&nbsp; The flavor of some of these creatures is the only reason they existed to begin with.&nbsp; We have different colored dragons today because Gygax was looking for ways to challenge players and keep them on their toes, and many characters found out the hard way.&nbsp; The mechanics are meaningless without the flavor.&nbsp; The sense of wonderment and the challenge are what is important.In the search for balance and playability, I hope, that game designers keep in mind that the real risk of losing your character is a great part of the challenge of the creatures.&nbsp; If every creature is going to be redesigned so that they are push-overs, then the game loses a great deal of its appeal.I don't care how well designed and balanced a creature is, if it does not capture my imagination and make me feel like running an encounter right then and there, the creature's design is worthless.Simplifying is good when it does not at the same time create &quot;boring&quot; creatures; the cookie-cutter monster of the week.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="D'karr, post: 3145841, member: 336"] I do believe that tradition is worth much more than good design. The fact that we have a Third Edition of the "World's Most Popular Roleplaying Game" is not because of good design, even though Third Edition is much better designed than previous editions. It is because the game's traditions, those iconic concepts, captured the imagination of millions of players, way before Third Edition was even a glimmer in Peter Adkison's eye. ALL that happened even with the "poor" design, some might even say in spite of it. Third Edition is/was so successful because it provided those same traditions and a more consistent and better designed way to deliver those traditions. It didn't discard the traditions for the sake of efficiency or "better" design. Monsters that were "scary" in previous editions were still "scary" in 3e. Some even got "scarier." The flavor of some of these creatures is the only reason they existed to begin with. We have different colored dragons today because Gygax was looking for ways to challenge players and keep them on their toes, and many characters found out the hard way. The mechanics are meaningless without the flavor. The sense of wonderment and the challenge are what is important. In the search for balance and playability, I hope, that game designers keep in mind that the real risk of losing your character is a great part of the challenge of the creatures. If every creature is going to be redesigned so that they are push-overs, then the game loses a great deal of its appeal. I don't care how well designed and balanced a creature is, if it does not capture my imagination and make me feel like running an encounter right then and there, the creature's design is worthless. Simplifying is good when it does not at the same time create "boring" creatures; the cookie-cutter monster of the week. [/QUOTE]

Verification