NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 7816440" data-attributes="member: 5142">There are so many game systems in the market that I read through and think to myself, "There is a lot that this system does that I like, a lot that I love, but...". There are always a number of rules, mechanics, or flavor that I don't find to my particular liking or I would have done differently about the system or game, and I perhaps wish that they had done. After a certain point, I have come to realize that the argument appealing to "the game that X company should have made" can come with a lot of problematic assumptions that reflect my own biases. Am I the person or group being targeted by this game? Why should I assume that I should be targeted? Why should I assume that I know better than the author(s) and publisher whom they should target? Are others enjoying the game as it is written or played? Am I projecting my own desires for the product that I want on a hypothetical mass of people? And it seems like the question "who was this game made for?" begs the question, though it does so from an underlying presumption "if it does not appeal to me and my pet issues, then who else could possibly find this appealing?" And reading through the OP, one can definitely see how the thumb is on the scale in how they frame and rationalize their question. It seems like the question in the OP is framed from the presumption that no one is being targeted rather than attempting to gather any data and derive commonalities or trends between people who do find the game to their liking. Sure, one can attempt to deflect from this by saying "it's just discussion on a web forum and should not necessarily attempt rigorous scientific research." However, I am not proposing rigorous research here. A simple (and more neutral) question of "who likes this game and why?" would suffice for these purposes rather than starting from a position of bafflement that people would like it and that Paizo should have made some other game instead.</blockquote>

Verification