Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Graf" data-source="post: 4476367" data-attributes="member: 3087">Sorry if my prior post didn't strike the right tone.If people feel like there is something about the setting as written that prevents them from running the game that they want to then I (and I think I speak for all the rest of the judges when I say this) am 100% behind getting the setting adjusted so that they can run their game.We've had some tough moments trying to get different concepts in, but usually we've managed to work out a <a href="http://www.enworld.org/wiki/index.php/L4W:Transitive_Isles:Design#Modularity_and_Elements_Roles:_An_Example_of_Finding_a_Place_for_an_Idea" target="_blank">compromise  that manages to allow that concept to fit without re-writing the setting in such a way that it ignores the broader needs of the community</a>.If there is something specific that the setting doesn't have I totally think we should talk about it. But a generalized comment about "the central section should be bigger so I can put something there' always makes me queasy.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">What, exactly, are we going to put there?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Why do we need to put it there?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">If we do, say, increase Daunton by a factor of 10, so it's 300x300 and 30,000 square miles how do we decide what goes there?<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Do we have a big competition? (with all the hurt and the excitement of people; who were once contributing as equals suddenly finding their ideas ranked?)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Do we just let the first person to post, or the first person to submit an adventure get to decide what the setting will be for everyone else?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Do we try to put a bunch of arbitrary rules to make sure that Daunton is still the central part of the setting? Or do we just have multiple cities, with multiple recruiting taverns and try to justify everything with a massive system of portals?</li> </ul> </li> </ul>I'm  sure that everyone could, individually, come up with something that they want to be 'the central most important zone' but I don't think, collectively its a good use of our resources.</blockquote>

Verification