Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8247067" data-attributes="member: 18">Given the individuals selected? ABSOLUTELY!!! Absolutely. Yes! If they'd selected different OSR people, it wouldn't be at all (and indeed the OSR movement in general has been "reclaimed" so is no longer like that), but one was so bad they literally disavowed him and removed him from the credits, the other has views so broadly unacceptable he'd be banned from ENworld (indeed, he may well be). These two weren't merely "grogs", they were the tip of the spear of what you might call RPG ultra-conservatism (talking design not politics here), that make conventional grogs look very moderate indeed. The latter didn't even really have enough experience to qualify him to advise on basic RPG design, let alone a new edition of D&D, which made it particularly shocking, given his name was next to RPG design titans like Robin D. Laws, for god's sake!So yeah, they made an extremely serious unforced error there. And from the playtesting iterations it was very clear that they were discarding ideas which seemed popular, but also were non-groggy. We can never really know how popular they were, but the initial, closed playtesting stuff certainly largely or entirely went out to people on the groggy end of the scale too.None of these mistakes are particularly likely to be  made today, thankfully.</blockquote>