Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MrMyth" data-source="post: 5414382" data-attributes="member: 61155">The fact that fans of FR were disappointed by the 4E treatment of it might be proof that WotC made some bad calls about the direction they took it in - but it isn't proof that the 4E designers hate the game. &nbsp;That's what ProfC is trying to argue - whether you like it or not, the 4E FR setting was the work of people who felt they were genuinely improving the game. That doesn't mean they made the best possible changes - but the changes that were made, they made because they thought they were good decisions. &nbsp;And given that, when they received complaints over the setting, they have since followed up with 2 settings that have gotten very good reviews - that sounds like part of their goal is to listen to their fanbase and try not to repeat the mistakes they've made. &nbsp;Feel free to accuse the WotC designers of having made blunders with 4E. I won't say your wrong. (I don't think any edition of D&amp;D is perfect, myself, and the same goes for Pathfinder and pretty much every other RPG as well.) Even I like changes they made which you dislike, that doesn't change the fact that they've made choices which you disagree with. &nbsp;But claiming they made those choices because of a lack of passion for the game just seems willfully blind. And guess what, if you actually asked many of the people at Paizo - many designers who have worked alongside the designers at WotC, have gamed with them, who consider them friends - I'm confident they would tell you that the designers at WotC care about the game they are making just as much as the Paizo staff cares about Pathfinder, and are just as committed to making what they think is the best game they can.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MrMyth, post: 5414382, member: 61155"] The fact that fans of FR were disappointed by the 4E treatment of it might be proof that WotC made some bad calls about the direction they took it in - but it isn't proof that the 4E designers [I]hate the game[/I]. That's what ProfC is trying to argue - whether you like it or not, the 4E FR setting was the work of people who felt they were genuinely improving the game. That doesn't mean they made the best possible changes - but the changes that were made, they made because they [I]thought [/I]they were good decisions. And given that, when they received complaints over the setting, they have since followed up with 2 settings that have gotten very good reviews - that sounds like part of their goal [I]is [/I]to listen to their fanbase and try not to repeat the mistakes they've made. Feel free to accuse the WotC designers of having made blunders with 4E. I won't say your wrong. (I don't think any edition of D&D is perfect, myself, and the same goes for Pathfinder and pretty much every other RPG as well.) Even I like changes they made which you dislike, that doesn't change the fact that they've made choices which you disagree with. But claiming they made those choices because of a lack of passion for the game just seems willfully blind. And guess what, if you actually asked many of the people at Paizo - many designers who have worked alongside the designers at WotC, have gamed with them, who consider them friends - I'm confident they would tell you that the designers at WotC care about the game they are making just as much as the Paizo staff cares about Pathfinder, and are just as committed to making what they think is the best game they can. [/QUOTE]

Verification