Blog post on the feel of D&D (marmell, reynolds et all)

GVDammerung said:
4e D&D doesn't feel like D&D? No news here. 4e is D&D in name only. This is already quite clear in what is known and will be indesputable when the final rules are released.

As to Wotc not allowing the game's storied designers have a look at the 4e rules? No news here. Like JD most would not be gushing about 4e's feel. Most would be delivering the message JD delivers - 4e doesn't feel like D&D - ie 4e is D&D in name only.

Of course, 4e designers may want all the "glory" for themselves, as well. A case of penis envy - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penis_envy - on the part of the 4e designers vs the 3e and earlier designers.
Hi, GVDammerung! Have some kool-aid!
 

log in or register to remove this ad


GVDammerung said:
4e D&D doesn't feel like D&D? No news here. 4e is D&D in name only. This is already quite clear in what is known and will be indesputable when the final rules are released.

As to Wotc not allowing the game's storied designers have a look at the 4e rules? No news here. Like JD most would not be gushing about 4e's feel. Most would be delivering the message JD delivers - 4e doesn't feel like D&D - ie 4e is D&D in name only.

Of course, 4e designers may want all the "glory" for themselves, as well. A case of penis envy - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penis_envy - on the part of the 4e designers vs the 3e and earlier designers.
Hoo boy.

Okay, when combined with your other recent posts this falls under the category of 'ranting,' and we're not a big fan of that. I don't particularly care whether you're pro- or anti-4e, but I expect you to post appropriately in threads and not insult anyone (including the 4e designers). That line's being crossed. I'd also much prefer that you say "To me, 4e is D&D in name only" instead of stating it as an unsupportable absolute. That will definitely help this be a discussion instead of an argument.

If you or anyone else has any questions about this, please email me.
 

The_Gneech said:
{slight thread derailment}

Well, to be fair JD, there was also stuff like this, which didn't help.

{/slight thread derailment}

-The Gneech :cool:

First, the adventure in question has numerous precedents in the Tales of the Jedi era (where numerous Sith wannabes visit ancient Sith tombs on Korriban.

Second, the adventure in question was published over a year after the release of the original core rulebook--well after the playtesters had formed their opinion that d20 Star Wars was "D&D in space."

JD
 

It was always blindingly obvious to me that Star Wars was D&D in space. I mean, you have evil wizards, katanae, and magic. What more do you want?
 

hong said:
It was always blindingly obvious to me that Star Wars was D&D in space. I mean, you have evil wizards, katanae, and magic. What more do you want?
Star Wars was never science fiction. It's always been swords & sorcery in spaceship drag. I thought that was pretty much obvious to everyone.
 

Dr. Awkward said:
Star Wars was never science fiction. It's always been swords & sorcery in spaceship drag. I thought that was pretty much obvious to everyone.

Surely you jest? Star Wars is pure hardcore SF like Asimov or Heinlien.



... what?
 

Cadfan said:
4e solution- make throwing salt a per encounter ability. Take it out of the character's allotted pool of per encounter abilities.

See if the player still wants to throw salt once it isn't free.

If he does, then any potential brokenness is mitigated by only getting to do it once per encounter.

That's exactly what I was thinking... inflict the blinded condition(save ends)also it'd be Dex vrs Reflex...

Hey look everyone! we just made a new power!
 

JeDiWiker said:
I just don't believe that the only workable solution is a mechanic that effectively says "You can't use this power again until you've had your next 'coffee break.'"

"You can't use this power again until you've seen the sun climb the horizon."
 


Remove ads

Top