Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="filthgrinder" data-source="post: 4503324" data-attributes="member: 64984">I think this is an excellent example of the difference between those who say 4e is like 1e, and those who disagree. It's a type of &quot;forest for the trees&quot; deal.&nbsp;Folks who say 4e goes back to the roots, are looking at the forest. They are seeing the game in generalities who the overall play experience, the fun being had at the table, the type of adventure and the game played. &nbsp;The folks who don't agree are seeing the trees. They look specific mechanics, specific implied setting elements, or not rolling for stats (even though that option is provided in the PHB). &nbsp;I think that both sides are essiential right in their cases. WotC took a modern game design approach in building a game that would give the old school 1e feel. they went back and said, how should a D&amp;D game feel, and built up that game, using modern game design.&nbsp;Now, these modern game elements, are definitely different. All the powers and effects, new races and classes, you don't have that connect. However, once you step back, look at the overview, you see the connection.&nbsp;So I think that people on both sides of the issue are just arguing in circles because essientially their arguements are about different things.&nbsp;Now for a snide comment:I think a Dragonborn Warlord is more D&amp;D-ish than a spaceship, but we seem to forget Expedition to the Barrier Peaks.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="filthgrinder, post: 4503324, member: 64984"] I think this is an excellent example of the difference between those who say 4e is like 1e, and those who disagree. It's a type of "forest for the trees" deal. Folks who say 4e goes back to the roots, are looking at the forest. They are seeing the game in generalities who the overall play experience, the fun being had at the table, the type of adventure and the game played. The folks who don't agree are seeing the trees. They look specific mechanics, specific implied setting elements, or not rolling for stats (even though that option is provided in the PHB). I think that both sides are essiential right in their cases. WotC took a modern game design approach in building a game that would give the old school 1e feel. they went back and said, how should a D&D game feel, and built up that game, using modern game design. Now, these modern game elements, are definitely different. All the powers and effects, new races and classes, you don't have that connect. However, once you step back, look at the overview, you see the connection. So I think that people on both sides of the issue are just arguing in circles because essientially their arguements are about different things. Now for a snide comment: I think a Dragonborn Warlord is more D&D-ish than a spaceship, but we seem to forget Expedition to the Barrier Peaks. [/QUOTE]

Verification