Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 7525597" data-attributes="member: 957"><p>Noted</p><p>Page 42 still says exactly what it says. Page 42 is clear.</p><p></p><p>Hussar has said that it is poorly written. Others have told me to imply the answer. Now you are referencing a completely separate book that came out a year later.</p><p></p><p>I'll totally accept the idea that they screwed up at first and then started trying to fix it. So, maybe for someone who played it for a long time and over the past nine years since DMG2 came out has grown to take these implications and guidelines as errata. But there is no remotely reasonable way to read page 42 and interpret it as anything other than saying what I'm saying. </p><p></p><p>Again, go back and read my posts. I've stated a few times now that the method being suggested is a dramatic improvement over the RAW presented on P42 of the DMG. </p><p></p><p>I don't understand why 4E fans can't bring themselves to just say "yeah, that sucked, but they fixed it" because that seems to be the case. </p><p>It is no secret that WotC tried all kinds of things to fix 4E. </p><p></p><p>There are plenty of newbie DMs who just followed the rules, didn't like the result and never bought DMG2. There are plenty of experienced players who read this kind of thing and moved on to other games well before the DMG2 came out. Remember what this thread is about "the 4E that could have been". </p><p>Refusing to concede that there were serious flaws was a problem that the 4E fanbase held to throughout and they added to the alienation. There seems to be nothing left to gain by seeming to be dead set on ignoring the reality at this point.</p><p></p><p>4E was an AWESOME game for a very specific type of player. I've always said that and I still believe it. But that doesn't mean it was without flaws. </p><p>This was a flaw. And the fact that nobody is will to address page 42 by actually talking about the words which actually appear on page 42 is telling.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BryonD, post: 7525597, member: 957"] Noted Page 42 still says exactly what it says. Page 42 is clear. Hussar has said that it is poorly written. Others have told me to imply the answer. Now you are referencing a completely separate book that came out a year later. I'll totally accept the idea that they screwed up at first and then started trying to fix it. So, maybe for someone who played it for a long time and over the past nine years since DMG2 came out has grown to take these implications and guidelines as errata. But there is no remotely reasonable way to read page 42 and interpret it as anything other than saying what I'm saying. Again, go back and read my posts. I've stated a few times now that the method being suggested is a dramatic improvement over the RAW presented on P42 of the DMG. I don't understand why 4E fans can't bring themselves to just say "yeah, that sucked, but they fixed it" because that seems to be the case. It is no secret that WotC tried all kinds of things to fix 4E. There are plenty of newbie DMs who just followed the rules, didn't like the result and never bought DMG2. There are plenty of experienced players who read this kind of thing and moved on to other games well before the DMG2 came out. Remember what this thread is about "the 4E that could have been". Refusing to concede that there were serious flaws was a problem that the 4E fanbase held to throughout and they added to the alienation. There seems to be nothing left to gain by seeming to be dead set on ignoring the reality at this point. 4E was an AWESOME game for a very specific type of player. I've always said that and I still believe it. But that doesn't mean it was without flaws. This was a flaw. And the fact that nobody is will to address page 42 by actually talking about the words which actually appear on page 42 is telling. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
Top