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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6100260" data-attributes="member: 82106">No, I would just expect that the "Design Journal" would show how the thinking went. "We stated that we wanted to do X. We tried implementing it in ways A, B, and C. A was very unpopular for reason Q, B was unworkable for reason M, and C didn't actually solve X so we didn't do it. As a result we have not done X and our current thinking is that X is no longer a goal. However, as with other things, if we later find that X can be achieved we will revisit this decision." People can then of course still bemoan the demise of X, but they can't fault anyone and there's no appearance of a lie, there are just cold hard facts. Look at the way design is carried out these days on PF, you can read the whole saga on the forums. The designers post and respond, there's a relatively positive dynamic between them and the community and there are relatively few surprises or accusations of bad faith, etc. WotC talks about communication, and they have guys running around making statements all over the place, but what they lack is an official, coherent, systematic journal of the process, and they don't ever engage in any kind of actual discussion with the community except now and then through the once-removed medium of an interview where there can't be any back and forth discussion or detailed two-sided analysis. This is the problem. Mike needs to GET THE HELL ONTO THE FORUMS AND TALK BACK AND FORTH WITH PEOPLE, and make that the main form of communication, and maintain a design journal that documents the currently state of what's going on and is an actual working document. THAT would fix the problem. Now, maybe there are other ways to go about it, but clearly the current practice of random drive-by statements and vague one-way articles isn't cutting it.</blockquote>

Verification