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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6153113" data-attributes="member: 22779">I'm not sure if that's true or not to be honest.  In other cases, there's been a strong sentiment to go back to another edition's version of various elements.  Look at the recent Planescape stuff.  We saw a pretty strong rejection of 4e's approach.I don't think it's quite that simple.I mean, we've had 4 editions try to make monster races and every time it's been problematic.  And monster races (and by this I mean stuff that's actually monsters, not just orcs or hobgoblins or lizard men) have never really been popular IME.Well, I wouldn't do it that way.  There was 4 options there.  The first two were basically, I want this in the game, either, I really want it, or my game will have problems if it's not there.  The third option basically couldn't care less.  Their game won't be affected in the slightest by the inclusion or exclusion of these rules.  And the final group actually would prefer not to have these rules in the game.Basically, only 20% of respondents actually care if these rules are included.  80% either don't care or flat out don't want.  And, even excluding the "don't care" crowd, the numbers that flat out don't want double those who do.So, if you're a game company, what do you spend time and resources on?  Getting these rules right is difficult.  Thirty years of game history shows just how difficult getting these right are.  It's a very tricky element of game design that has never actually worked in the past.  Or at least, not worked very well.  But, OTOH, if you don't include it, you're pretty much guaranteed the gnome effect.  Sigh.</blockquote>

Verification