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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mark" data-source="post: 908687" data-attributes="member: 5">Fair enough.  I am merely saying that ninety percent would be a vast majority...not saying that a vast majority is required for it to be a valid change.  However, if less than half are enthusiastic, or even positive about the change, certainly there is something wrong with the thought process that brought us to this point, eh?As previously stated, there are things that probably have required changes because the vast majority were not satisfied with how things were.  Perhaps, Rangers (in general) is the most glaring example of such things.  Polymorph has never really sat right with many people, though I would not be so sure that a vast majority wasn't happy adjudicating it how they liked at their own tables.  I'll leave that one alone as I am neither pleased nor displeased that it has undergone some changes.I've pointed out a myriad of examples why such changes were not needed in this case all as valid as the ones cited to support the reasons for change.  I've further made mention of a number of additional reasons why such a change is not required and, in fact, is detrimental.  When I see those reasons satisfactorially refuted then perhaps I could get on board.  From my current position, though, I do not see how.To be analagous, let's say that every game is a basket of oranges.  Each piece of fruit is one aspect of the game or another.  The rules that make up the system that governs the game are there, IMO, to peel away the rind and leave as much of the pulpy fruit to enjoy as can be had.  There will always be a few bits that might be a little sour, others are sweet, but both can be enjoyed by different people.  It seems to me that we had gotten through the rind with this particular factor of the game and had left as much fruit as could be expected.  Now, with this change, it seems to me that we are removing sections of perfectly fine fruit simply because someone doesn't like either the sour sections or the sweet.I disagree that just because some groups may press onward when they might be better off not pressing onward that the rules should be changed to discourage that choice.  I do not thing that lessening a spell's variety of uses to accomplish the above end makes good game design sense.  A change is being made in the game based on how some groups have played, not because the thing that is being changed was inherently broken.  More is being lost by this change than is being gained.*EDIT* Joe's got it in a nutshell.</blockquote>

Verification