Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tovec" data-source="post: 6267831" data-attributes="member: 95493">Actually in this context that is exactly what I would define as happy. If everyone can come together and "live with" the same game then the job was successfully done. Especially if you are able to draw together people from across very different games. Happy in this context means that perhaps not any one person gets exactly what they want, but every person gets enough of what they want so that they can play the same game. The more you specialize and cater to one group the more you limit who can play your game. I specialize and work on my own thing, and the final product will be something I absolutely adore. But I'm not looking to make money and sell my product to you. Nor am I a professional game designer with a full blown game company behind me setting deadlines and figures I must meet. In such a case the win condition isn't to please myself, it is to please as many as possible. To do that I need to look at ideas that come from somewhere other than my own head. I need to look at the people who think I'm doing a terrible job and figure out if I can fix the game for them and make it palatable.Obviously there are people who aren't going to find the game good no matter what is done, but if there is a sizable portion that dislikes a very specific aspect then it is worth looking into and probably changing. From WotC's standpoint they probably could care less if the designers love DOAM since there is such a loud population that seems to find it repulsive. If they want us, they need to look at that. And if they want us then the easiest means to getting us is by simply dropping the DOAM ability, replacing it with something more palatable and likely giving it to us later in a less in-your-face way (ie. option module to be added back on). This isn't the case with everything, it can't be. There has got to be a default. But in this specific situation the added on after the fact is an easier change than removing it.I know what the word bland means, thanks. That is in fact why I italicized it. In this context (since it's a RPG and not food) I'm using it to mean unpalatable. Something that is not enjoyed, at least by some. Something that is not to ones taste. It is as much bland as it is icky, or yucky, or any other term you would like to throw at it. I'm not saying it is "chocolate" I'm saying it is a flavour I do not care for <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":P" title="Stick out tongue    :P"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":P" />If the makers of 13thAge were trying to make a game that WotC is aiming for then they failed and to those they tried to recruit they made a game that is icky/yucky/bland to their taste of an RPG. To 4e players, they (seem to have) found an amazing series of rules for people to enjoy. But they aren't trying to recruit the non-4e people, and thus to those people the game is bland and unimpressive.</blockquote>

Verification