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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ComradeGnull" data-source="post: 6000245" data-attributes="member: 6685694">I think expectations definitely got too high quickly- particularly, I think some people took 'modularity' to mean something along the lines of 'we're not going to publish a game, we're going to publish a kit for building a game'- like when you flip through the core book, the first few chapters are going to be on selecting the combat system, magic system, skill system, etc., that you are going to use, with no 'default' assumed.Along the same lines, people's expectations about how 'modular' the playtest kits will be has also been a little too high.  Just because something is not described as being an option, or being something that can be relegated to a moduled, in the playtest document, that doesn't mean that is the final form of a rule or system.  There are limits to how much flexibility they can give us during the 'test' phase without seriously undermining the utility of the feedback they are getting during the playtest.The same thought occurs to me when I see people already talking about houseruling and modifying the playtest rules extensively.  "We ran a playtest game, but I swapped out the skill system and used something else, and we ignored specialties and selected feats individually, and I did some guesswork to port over Dragonborn as a playable race, and we created our own version of the Paladin class..."  Um... Ok.  That's great if you were doing that just for fun, but in terms of providing meaningful feedback to the publisher, not sure how useful it is to take an incomplete system and immediately start houseruling it and extending it in ways that may or may not be compatable with the future direction of the rules.</blockquote>

Verification