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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Graf" data-source="post: 1159869" data-attributes="member: 3087">Psion: I think most people are discriminating. I've frequently purchased books you've given mixed comments on if I felt they weren't applicable to my game/gaming mindset.Broadly I think that any review that gives you a good idea about 1. What's in the book.2. What the reviewer liked about the book and why it appealed to them.3. What the reviewer disliked about the book and why it didn't work out.4. An overview of the mechanical soundness of any rules, with an emphasis on trouble spots and ideally, a discussion of why something looks like it cause trouble.Not having read the book or the review I can't really comment on the review, per se. But I find the complaint contradictory.This is a D&D/D20 site. It may be a great game system but Ars Magica stuff isn't covered on EnWorld. If an Ars Magica product came out and was presented as a supplement that might be appropriate for a D&D player/DM to look at I would expect a reviewer to discuss how much was useful to D&D, how much could be changed to be useful for D&D etc.I expect the same for setting based products (is the material useful outside of the setting, does it require a lot of assumptions that aren't present in generic settings?). Likewise if a 3.0 product came out now I would appreciate comments from a reviewer about whether it incorporated 3.5 changes and how much effort would be required to change a book to match up with 3.5.UA seems particularly likely to get into this problem due to its peculiar marketing: on one hand it's implied that its D&D compatible, covered on EnWorld, etc. On the other hand it's really its own game system. Most UA material requires at least some work to translate to D&D. A review to D&D oriented consumers mentioning clearing mentioning that aspect of the product, and considering that aspect in giving a review rating seems more than fair.I mean, UA could, like so many other fantasy games that are similar-to-but-different-than-D&D, not be covered on EnWorld at all.</blockquote>

Verification