Clark Peterson on 4E

[The Little Raven]

This is so bizarre.

The bizarre thing to me is that this seems aimed at anti-4e people (some of whom view this as a good thing), but it would require those people to actually purchase 4e in order to use the supplement.

"It's a book about playing like previous editions, and it only requires you to buy the game you don't want to play in order to use it."

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Are you actually trying to argue that he claims to be able to do it right (which implies it wasn't done right) isn't a criticism? That it doesn't have the "soul of D&D" (which is an explicit claim that it wasn't done right) isn't a criticism? When he talks about getting rid of 4e stuff (like it's "anime crap"), that isn't a criticism?

Because if you are, that's just ridiculous.

Telling people to "image it done right" or claiming that he can "do it right" or that he can restore it's "soul" is definitely criticizing the current product, and all of the semantic song and dance doesn't change that.



Indeed. However, the problem is that he didn't say that. He said "I can make a 4e done right." By saying "done right," he is saying that it should have been done differently, because if it's not done right, the only other option is that it was done wrong.

I fear that you're a little overanalyizing his statement here.
It appears to me that "I don't want to critisize 4E" he wants to say more like: "I don't want to start a flamewar, say 4E sucks, or the designers are all mad and destroying D&D, or whatever else ridicilous stupid things have beens said in the edition wars. I am just saying there are things 4E can be done better - in my (and my colleagues and friends) view."

Of course he criticizes D&D 4 - if he wants to do something different from 4E, there are obvious things he doesn't like.

You are missing the point. The aknowledgment within Clarc's sayings is that 4e does not feel as a roleplaying game ( D&D as a term is used to represent a gronard currency value of story-driven roleplaying instead of game-driven roleplaying):
"you feel like you are playing checkers not D&D, and in a mass of silly powers that all seem to let you move a square or move the target a square or do damage. I mean, how many million times do you need a differently named power to redundantly do pretty much the same thing. Where is the inspiration?"
And I do not think he is any wrong here.

What you interpret from it and what he is writing are two different things, and I tend to assume you're reading what you want to read.
if it is what he means to say, he is wrong (as wrong as a subjective opinion can be - it might be true for him, it isn't for me).

if it's tiring then maybe you shouldn't engage in it...

I wish I was that smart... I really wish. *sigh*

Maybe I should follow hongs example and get Mass Effect and play instead of post.

 

[The Little Raven]

It was a class comparison.

You can't compare them without also drawing on the expected itemization they would have, according to the core rules wealth-by-level guidelines. Because if you do, then the non-caster is even more screwed, since it's assumed he will have magic weapons and armor in order to combat higher level threats... threats which will mop the floor with them if that itemization is non-existent.

 

[Halivar]

Let me also add, that despite my enjoyment of 4E, the powers fluff stinks.

Best flavor reskin ever: in my Wednesday night game, one of my players introduced his new fey-pact warlock as a voodoo shaman. He replaced "eldritch blast" with "stab dee voodoo doll wit dee pact blade, mon." The flavor text is, IMHO, only an example* of how it can work. The mechanics are a skeleton, and we drape our own fluff on it.

*That may not be how WotC intended it, but it's how I use it.

 

[JVisgaitis]

The bizarre thing to me is that this seems aimed at anti-4e people (some of whom view this as a good thing), but it would require those people to actually purchase 4e in order to use the supplement.

"It's a book about playing like previous editions, and it only requires you to buy the game you don't want to play in order to use it."

Yeah, that's what I meant. It seems like nothing more than a marketing move to me. I feel like I woke up in crazy town.

 

[Filcher]

Best flavor reskin ever: in my Wednesday night game, one of my players introduced his new fey-pact warlock as a voodoo shaman. He replaced "eldritch blast" with "stab dee voodoo doll wit dee pact blade, mon." The flavor text is, IMHO, only an example* of how it can work. The mechanics are a skeleton, and we drape our own fluff on it.

*That may not be how WotC intended it, but it's how I use it.

Amen. (Especially w/ Martial Powers.) I almost with they left a space in the rule books to write in our own power descriptions. The mechanics are the same, but the fluff is unique (and meaningful) to the specific character/campaign.

 

[Kishin]

Are you actually trying to argue that he claims to be able to do it right (which implies it wasn't done right) isn't a criticism? That it doesn't have the "soul of D&D" (which is an explicit claim that it wasn't done right) isn't a criticism? When he talks about getting rid of 4e stuff (like it's "anime crap"), that isn't a criticism?

Because if you are, that's just ridiculous.

Telling people to "image it done right" or claiming that he can "do it right" or that he can restore it's "soul" is definitely criticizing the current product, and all of the semantic song and dance doesn't change that.

QFT. Sorry folks, but there's no way to say Clark isn't criticizing the current product here, which to me is just baffling considering how rah-rah cheerleader he'd been about it all the way up until recent months. Its pretty typical of human beings in general, though.

We really don't need to come out and try and sugarcoat what he's saying, though. Clark's a big boy, a respected member of the community and a longtime ENWorld poster. He knows how these things go, and I'm sure he's well prepared to take a few shots for his opinion.

Clark, when you switch horses in the middle of the stream so suddenly, and start slinging language like 'anime crap' praising Vancian mechanics, it kinda starts to make you look a little...comical, particularly in the latter case. I'm not saying you're not allowed to change your opinion, but when your response contains buzzword-style criticism, it doesn't feel like its coming from someone of your stature in the community.

Yeah, that's what I meant. It seems like nothing more than a marketing move to me. I feel like I woke up in crazy town.

I think Crazy Town was actually the original name of the Internet before the Mayor of the Tubes voted to have it changed to something more tourist friendly.

 

[Sunderstone]

You can't compare them without also drawing on the expected itemization they would have,

Sure I can not everyone follows "expected" rules. Probably because as Ive stated, my group and I wouldnt care about Items that duplicate another class function/ability.
Wealth by level works fine for all classes, no one said we had to take items that duplicate another class function.

late edit*** btw to the others, sorry for the slight derail.

 

[Shroomy]

Clark is entitled to both his opinions and his taste in games, but was he trying to intentionally anger 4e fans with his references to the "soul of D&D," "anime crap," etc., etc.? Which is weird, since he is usually so diplomatic.

 

[Sunderstone]

Clark is entitled to both his opinions and his taste in games, but was he trying to intentionally anger 4e fans with his references to the "soul of D&D," "anime crap," etc., etc.? Which is weird, since he is usually so diplomatic.

mood swings? no morning coffee?