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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Helldritch" data-source="post: 8132444" data-attributes="member: 6855114">It has nothing to do with one particular person or table. It has everything to do with the majority of what is played at tables around the world. That rule might have worked out for you, Max and many others, but it was disruptive enough for the majority that the designers had no choice but to class that rule as bad balance wise.A designer does not make rule for a minority A designer makes rule for the majority, knowing full well that some tables will ignore or improve on what will be at their table. It does mean that the designers will also have to take into account that some table will be inexperienced enough to not recognize if a rule might be disruptive enough. At some point, that rule was deemed disruptive enough to be entirerly removed for the greater good of both the brand and the player base.A few here believe that I appointed my self the defender of the young and inexperienced. In a sense, it is not that far from the truth. The truth is that I always go for what will the majority will do with a rule/expansion/source book and check how it could derailed. Just like the designers do.It is easy to say:"At my table it would not be so. At my table I know." But at some point you have to think that many are not as experienced or stubborn as you and I are. Unless we do not care about the hobby, we must take into account those that are young or inexperienced (or both) when judging if a rule is good or bad. Because in the end, if a rule ends up so disruptive as to turn away the majority of the customers toward other product, the brand might fall.And for those who sniff at my arguments, does 4ed and Pathfinder ring a bell?</blockquote>

Verification