Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5352337" data-attributes="member: 22779">I'm not saying that system was the reason for leaving, Lanefan.&nbsp; In fact, I would assume that it wasn't usually the reason.&nbsp; After all, if you've sat down to play a given game, likely you're at least somewhat interested in that game.But, if campaigns typically only last a year and groups not much more than that (which is what the WOTC market survey information says), then why would they design a game with the assumption that campaigns will last longer than that?BOTE - I think you're actually agreeing with me.&nbsp; Your loose campaign is generating loads more players than your tight campaign.&nbsp; Wouldn't it make sense to design a game with the loose campaign in mind?Which is what I said in the first place.&nbsp; Why design a game based on a small, limited number of hard-core players instead of designing to wider appeal?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 5352337, member: 22779"] I'm not saying that system was the reason for leaving, Lanefan. In fact, I would assume that it wasn't usually the reason. After all, if you've sat down to play a given game, likely you're at least somewhat interested in that game. But, if campaigns typically only last a year and groups not much more than that (which is what the WOTC market survey information says), then why would they design a game with the assumption that campaigns will last longer than that? BOTE - I think you're actually agreeing with me. Your loose campaign is generating loads more players than your tight campaign. Wouldn't it make sense to design a game with the loose campaign in mind? Which is what I said in the first place. Why design a game based on a small, limited number of hard-core players instead of designing to wider appeal? [/QUOTE]

Verification