RPGs and Silly Statements from Creators
First, there are aspects to the game I just Do Not Like, such as Land Management. Second, there's this comment from Wick:
In D&D, the most common kind of character is a wandering nomad who lives outside the law, an adventurer roaming the countryside, scouring dungeons, killing monsters, gaining treasure and weapons so he can kill bigger monsters. Cities are little more than outdoor dungeons and characters rarely—if ever—encounter the upper class or deal with politics.
Clearly, Wick has never played in a D&D Game run by me, or by most of the people I game with. I have only rarely played in a D&D game wherein politics and political maneuvering were not part of the game (though sometimes my PC was not directly involved) and in which the nobility didn't show up often, and wouldn't enjoy D&D if a typical game in my experience was as Wick describes. And I cannot shake the feeling that if the designer and I are coming from such completely different perspectives, I will not like the game.
Third, there is the fact that the text I've read in previews bores me to tears.
Bottom line: I'm not the targeted audience for this game. Until 4th edition, I've never had any real issues with D&D's setup or "flavor," so I'm not terribly interested in an "anti-D&D" game. I've played many games, with many different systems, and honestly, few have bugged me much as the "Indie" games I've played. There's just something about people who think the hobby needs to be "fixed" that annoys me. By all means, make your games. Those who like them will play them, those who don't obviously won't, but please, indie developers, please, just admit that you're not "fixing" anything--you're certainly adding to the available games, but you're not leading the charge that will reform all gaming.
Anyway, that's just my two cents; feel free to disagree and discuss it with me. :)