(Markconz @ Nov. 19 2007,21:24)
QUOTE
(Steve54 @ Nov. 19 2007,12:04)
QUOTE
Another point is which 'game' rules to use, I've seen reports using every rule change in the handbooks which would seem pointless as it is highly unlikely that all the changes will go through.
Perhaps a baseline of using all rules marked official, ERC approved and widely accepted might be adopted.
There has been almost no feedback criticising most of the changes, despite them being posted here and at SG specifically for that purpose, for well over a month now (and they have after all come after 3 years of extensive ?development and feedback processes before that). Additionally the historical 'change status' has made little difference to which rules are actually popular ones in what little feedback there has been. ?
I'm forced to conclude that most people are happy with the vast majority of them (certainly those who actually bother posting battle reports here). ?Thus contrary to what you say, I think it makes far more sense to use the whole lot when playtesting (as people have already been doing), given that something very close to those documents is likely to be the new experimental rules most people will be using.
We've chosen to use the entire document for our campaign, and, as far as I can tell, it is a well-liked change. I don't think we have come up with an issue yet where we think or say "why did they change THAT?" Quite the opposite, actually...nearly every change we find gets the same general comment..."That was an intelligent change."
Thanks for the Hard Work. 