Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 7673875" data-attributes="member: 22779">I see.&nbsp; So, as long as you get what you want, the rest of us can go hang?&nbsp; Really?For me, I'd rather see a playtest cycle for development.&nbsp; Start as simple as possible, see if that works and then increase complexity with each iteration and see what makes the most people happy.I'd say the pattern they seem to be using for the artificer is fantastic.&nbsp; Sure, the first artificer wasn't great and had issues.&nbsp; Ok, fine.&nbsp; Go back and fiddle with it, and try again.&nbsp; I'm pretty sure the next iteration will be better received.&nbsp; At some point, you'll make enough people happy that you're done.&nbsp; Why start from a highly complicated point, adding entire new classes and mechanics, before determining if you could do it easier first?&nbsp; Wouldn't that be a lot easier to balance with existing mechanics?&nbsp; With your way, we get 2e Psionics and hope like heck that it isn't broken.&nbsp; With my way, we get a finalised version that has been through multiple playtest periods and won't be broken.&nbsp; Just because you want a Psion that is completely different from existing classes does not mean that's the best way to achieve it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 7673875, member: 22779"] I see. So, as long as you get what you want, the rest of us can go hang? Really? For me, I'd rather see a playtest cycle for development. Start as simple as possible, see if that works and then increase complexity with each iteration and see what makes the most people happy. I'd say the pattern they seem to be using for the artificer is fantastic. Sure, the first artificer wasn't great and had issues. Ok, fine. Go back and fiddle with it, and try again. I'm pretty sure the next iteration will be better received. At some point, you'll make enough people happy that you're done. Why start from a highly complicated point, adding entire new classes and mechanics, before determining if you could do it easier first? Wouldn't that be a lot easier to balance with existing mechanics? With your way, we get 2e Psionics and hope like heck that it isn't broken. With my way, we get a finalised version that has been through multiple playtest periods and won't be broken. Just because you want a Psion that is completely different from existing classes does not mean that's the best way to achieve it. [/QUOTE]

Verification