Clark Peterson on 4E

[Irda Ranger]

Whoa. 5 at once?! That's insane.

I used to think split the tree was a lame power, but I've been made a believer.

Yeah, but that is a talent so rare it can only be found on YouTube. Does it make sense that every 1st level Ranger could do that? C'mon now. Anyway, I'm pretty sure that's a high-level Feat from a 3PP. And it's broken.

 

[cangrejoide]

Clark -

The sad fact is, regardless of how well worded you made your statement, there would have still been people here who would've gotten upset enough to attack you for it. There is, depressingly enough, a group of people on these forums that takes any joke about 4e, or event he thought that 4e could be improved, as a personal insult.

I completely disagree. Like I stated earlier and Clark himself has stated, his choice of words were not the most appropiate and they were interpreted as mostly anti 4E propaganda. This coming from someone who has championed 4E since it was announced prompted the earlier posts here,and in RPGnet.

There is not a group of people here or anywhere else that "takes any joke about 4e as a personal insult" anymore than there is a group of people that "Actively trolls 4E posts to threadcrap and defame 4E".

Even suggesting that, is just 'crazy talk'.

 

[JVisgaitis]

I guess in the end my problem is that this is (to me) simply too cinematic (notice I didnt say anime) for my style of play in general and for first level PCs in particular.

I have to admit, a lot of people in my group still can't get over the crazy abilities of the characters. It doesn't ruin the game for them, but I can see where you are coming from.

So where is the point where this becomes acceptable to you? I have no clue what you are planning on doing, but if you tuned the power curve and just added lower level abilities so that the characters were more mundane at lower levels, would split the tree be a 10th level power? A 20th level power?

 

[TwinBahamut]

Yeah, but that is a talent so rare it can only be found on YouTube. Does it make sense that every 1st level Ranger could do that? C'mon now.

Yes, it makes sense. By the time a Ranger is first level, he is already a proficient archer. There is no reason that 1st level has to be the level of ignorant, talentless commoners.

After all, by the time a person hits Paragon levels, let alone Epic levels, we are talking about feats that should be impossible for people in the real world, even for crazy things you see on YouTube. This is fantasy we are talking about, after all, and it needs to cover Hercules, Rama, and Gilgamesh just as well as it covers Robin Hood.

Anyways, getting back to the original topic...

I really don't care how much Mr. Peterson admits that his wording was a poor choice. Anyone who uses the term "cheesy anime crap" loses me as a potential customer. If you think "cheesy anime crap" is even a valid phrasing for something, than you are so far out of touch with my preferences and interests that I don't need to bother looking at your products in any more detail.

Honestly, I would be much more interested in "4E D&D that is more like a good anime" than "4E D&D that is more like 1E". One of my complaints about 4E is that the game is almost schizophrenic with the way it both lets people do cool things, yet at the same time puts overly "realistic" limits on what is possible (like with the Athletics skill). The game would be more fun if those limits were much more loose.

 

[Wisdom Penalty]

Clark -

The sad fact is, regardless of how well worded you made your statement, there would have still been people here who would've gotten upset enough to attack you for it. There is, depressingly enough, a group of people on these forums that takes any joke about 4e, or event he thought that 4e could be improved, as a personal insult.

We have a winner.

Cirno...enough already. Your post before the one I just quoted begins with
"Like I said already...", and yet you proceed to repeat yourself. And then repeat yourself. Again.

Yada, yada, yada...blah blah blah...we get it. Really, we do. You are upset that some people were angry when they thought Clark was anti-4e.

He's not.

They were wrong.

You have always possessed punctilious courtesy on the boards.

End of story.

Move on.

To distill it even further:

(1) The man admittedly loves 4e.
(2) The man wants to make 4e better.
(3) Most agree with (1) and are perfectly fine with someone trying (2).
(4) Everyone wins.

Good night.

WP

 

[cangrejoide]

We have a winner.

Cirno...enough already. Your post before the one I just quoted begins with
"Like I said already...", and yet you proceed to repeat yourself. And then repeat yourself. Again.

Yada, yada, yada...blah blah blah...we get it. Really, we do. You are upset that some people were angry when they thought Clark was anti-4e.

Good night.

WP

You sir, you should change your ENworld handle to Wisdom bonus.

 

[Filcher]

XP to WP. Hell, XP all around!

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

XP to WP. Hell, XP all around!

I'll take my XP in the form of 1 ounce (troy) gold coins, .999 fine. Thanks!

 

[Henry]

Anyone who uses the term "cheesy anime crap" loses me as a potential customer.

(SNIP)

Honestly, I would be much more interested in "4E D&D that is more like a good anime" than "4E D&D that is more like 1E".

I think you answered your first point with your second. Clark's audience isn't the gamer who wants D&D to be extremely "over the top." This is a guy who was so successful from 2000 to 2006 (at the least) that he bucked the entire trend of "modules don't sell," because he knew his audience, found 'em, and catered to them.

He's also the guy who's fought perhaps harder than anyone save Scott Rouse in my opinion to keep D&D accessible to the hobby game community, and keep alive the level of choice that Ryan Dancey and Peter Adkison started. It's great to cater to one type of gamer, but I definitely preferred the level of D&D (though the OGL) from about 2000 to 2006 that catered to MOST types of gamer.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Yes, it makes sense. By the time a Ranger is first level, he is already a proficient archer. There is no reason that 1st level has to be the level of ignorant, talentless commoners.

After all, by the time a person hits Paragon levels, let alone Epic levels, we are talking about feats that should be impossible for people in the real world, even for crazy things you see on YouTube. This is fantasy we are talking about, after all, and it needs to cover Hercules, Rama, and Gilgamesh just as well as it covers Robin Hood.

Anyways, getting back to the original topic...

I really don't care how much Mr. Peterson admits that his wording was a poor choice. Anyone who uses the term "cheesy anime crap" loses me as a potential customer. If you think "cheesy anime crap" is even a valid phrasing for something, than you are so far out of touch with my preferences and interests that I don't need to bother looking at your products in any more detail.

Honestly, I would be much more interested in "4E D&D that is more like a good anime" than "4E D&D that is more like 1E". One of my complaints about 4E is that the game is almost schizophrenic with the way it both lets people do cool things, yet at the same time puts overly "realistic" limits on what is possible (like with the Athletics skill). The game would be more fun if those limits were much more loose.

On the other hand his comments about cheesy anime crap got me interested in his project. So he lost you as a customer and gained me as a possible customer after I had pretty much sworn off anything 4e related. He can't cater to every gamer.