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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="innerdude" data-source="post: 5655057" data-attributes="member: 85870">I can't remember if it was pemerton or someone else in the Could Wizards ACTUALLY make MOST people happy with a new edition? who brought up the fact that (A)D&D has, for much of its existence, sort of assumed that rightly or wrongly it had to be "all things to all people." And I'm wondering if: <ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">That expectation is real, or if it was more the result of D&D being the figurative "only game in town" for much of its formative years,</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">If it's even a realistic mind set for a game designer to have in the first place, and</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Do we as players now naturally assume that there's going to be "the right tool for the right job" (i.e., a specific system designed for a specific style of play), or would we naturally gravitate to a system that made the attempt?</li> </ol>When I think what an "All things to all" type of system would require, it sounds less and less like something that is feasible. There's just too many things it would have to cover: <ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">It would have to support as many game styles as possible: Gamist, Narrativist, Simulationist, Actor/Author/Director, etc.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">It would have to be simple enough for beginners, yet complex enough for later players (or be "modular" or "scalable" enough for both).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">It would have to present robust combat and out-of-combat actions, without becoming unwieldy.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">It would have to allow for a broad range of character concepts without being "unbalanced."</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">It would have to support both minis-based encounters, as well as free form.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">It would have to support some form of community/"living" play.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">It would need to have a feasible third-party licensing structure.</li> </ul>When I look at it in a list form like that, it seems such an overwhelming task that I'm almost willing to shake the hand of anyone who's ever tried to build an RPG even if it didn't quite turn out the way they wanted/expected it to. But is this REALLY what we, the gaming community wants? Do we really want a "Unified Game Edition," or are we happy with the current diversification in our chosen hobby?</blockquote>

Verification