Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Iku Rex" data-source="post: 3724520" data-attributes="member: 752">How can they have years of player input on a system that isn't even 100% finished yet?When they published the 3.0 and 3.5 editions they also claimed to have gathered player input for years. Have you seen the errata threads? The endless message board discussions over how common game elements are supposed to work? It's one thing to say &quot;this doesn't work&quot;. Coming up with a consistent, balanced and clearly worded alternative is another matter entirely. *** new post ***&nbsp;There is a difference, but that doesn't mean it's impossible to catch problems just by reading the rules. And if &quot;playing the game&quot; is how you get feedback, then what could be better than having vast hordes of playtesters sharing their opinions?Can you imagine if some sort of System Reference Document containing the 3rd edition rules had been available for free online? They'd hardly have sold a single 3.X core rulebook! Wait. Sorry. We did have an SRD, and they still sold plenty of books. The 3.5 edition is an even better example - people had a &quot;enough information to play the game&quot;, they knew the 3.5 SRD was available (or right around the corner) and yet most still shelled out for the latest official hardcover version of the rules. If lots of people freak out over or don't like something then that's a sign that it requires special consideration. I guess I have more faith in WotC's game designers than you, but I think they will make better decisions if the decisions are informed.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Iku Rex, post: 3724520, member: 752"] How can they have years of player input on a system that isn't even 100% finished yet? When they published the 3.0 and 3.5 editions they also claimed to have gathered player input for years. Have you [I]seen[/I] the errata threads? The endless message board discussions over how common game elements are supposed to work? It's one thing to say "this doesn't work". Coming up with a consistent, balanced and clearly worded alternative is another matter entirely. *** new post *** There is a difference, but that doesn't mean it's impossible to catch problems just by reading the rules. And if "playing the game" is how you get feedback, then what could be better than having vast hordes of playtesters sharing their opinions? Can you imagine if some sort of [b]S[/b]ystem [b]R[/b]eference [b]D[/b]ocument containing the 3rd edition rules had been available for free online? They'd hardly have sold a single 3.X core rulebook! Wait. Sorry. We did have an SRD, and they still sold plenty of books. The 3.5 edition is an even better example - people had a "enough information to play the game", they knew the 3.5 SRD was available (or right around the corner) and yet most still shelled out for the latest [I]official[/I] hardcover version of the rules. If lots of people freak out over or don't like something then that's a sign that it requires special consideration. I guess I have more faith in WotC's game designers than you, but I think they will make better decisions if the decisions are [I]informed[/I]. [/QUOTE]

Verification