Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 4285826" data-attributes="member: 2067">I agree that more rules doesn't mean that the system is easier to tinker with.It's not about the quantity of the rules at all.It's about what those rules cover.The 4e rules at launch don't cover running, say, Chaotic Neutral Half-Orc Druids. The 3e rules did.That means that no one using only the 4e launch rules will be able to use that, while someone using the 3e launch rules could.This increases the "tinkerability" because, at the very least, it adds a feature that you can then subtract. If you say "There are no Chaotic Neutral Half-Orc Druids," then you make a declaration about the world, because you're still allowing CE half-orc druids, or CN gnome druids, or CN half-orc aristocrats. Similarly, if you just ditch one of those elements ("No CN alignment, no half-orcs, or no druids") you have changed your game. Each of those elements is something you can tinker with.At the very basic level, every rule or option is something that you can do one of two things with: allow or reject. More options = more decisions to allow or reject being possible = more "tinkering" by allowing or disallowing different options. 4e has fewer options, thus fewer decisions to make, thus less tinkering.Okay, sure, but by giving people rules for these options, they give people the opportunity to accept or reject the rules themselves as well as each part of the rule. That allows more rules customization, which is synonymous, in my usage, with "tinkering." "Tinkering" is modifying the existing set. If there is less in the existing set to modify, then you can't tinker as much. You can always add brand new stuff, but that's not a virtue to everyone, and its actually a flaw to many, because it is always easier to cut something down than to build something up (and thus it is easier to ignore a rule you don't use than it is to invent a good rule for something you need but the game doesn't provide). A lack of rules isn't an inherently freeing or desirable thing, or else we'd all be playing Rock Paper Scissors for task resolution and deciding what happens next purely based on narrative contrivance. That's no more desirable than an impenetrable codex of legalesque gibberish that falls like a Jenga tower when you move a block around. 4e certainly doesn't embrace either one of those ethos.Repeating something that's wrong doesn't make it any more right. I don't know of any other way to refute this that I haven't used already. No, you are incorrect, it is not. Casual is a descriptive term, not a value judgment.Probably because I can't respond to something that hasn't been presented in the discussion yet?So if you'd like, I can respond now?Look, I understand that you feel like 3e made you watch while it drowned a whole sackful of kittens and that you're really happy that 4e is giving you a million dollars and a night in a hotel with <a href="http://www.keebler.net/blog/wp-content/images/2006/07/Tricia_Helfer0406.jpg" target="_blank">Tricia Helfer</a>. I just don't care about what you feel like. I care (a little) about what each game actually does, and when you can talk about that without crying about your sackful of kittens and telling me how much you love your future marriage to Trish, maybe I will begin to care (a little) about what you feel like.Hm...the internet just got a little bit sadder now that I realize "casual" is frequently an elitist put-down.Tonight I will say my little evil prayers to the Old Ones that I never, ever, ever reach a point where my head is so far up my rear that I think that those who don't put their heads up their rear are somehow beneath me.No, "Casual" is a description, when I'm using it here, at least. It is, actually, a mostly positive one -- I like my Wii. I like 4e. I enjoy getting people into things that they don't have to obsess over to have fun with. 4e is definately a step in that direction of being "casual," and I like it for that.I think all the hair-splitting between "casual" and "easy to learn" and "straightforward" and "highly efficient" is semantic nonsense for the most part. If you don't believe me, get a thesaurus and/or an English Literature degree. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Wrong.I don't care if you think 3e is a mess or if you think 3e gave you AIDS, or, for that matter, if you think 3e is the second coming of Gygax. The plumage don't enter into it. I'm still wildly unclear about where this rule breaking is going on. I'm just telling you that "4e roolz 3e droolz" gets no one anywhere and I'm probably telling you that because it is probably my #2 pet peeve here at ENWorld, tied with its inverse "3e roolz and 4e droolz" and following closely behind people not posting more pictures of sexy folks.I'm also probably telling you that so you can perhaps understand why you're really wrong when you think that someone calling 4e "casual" is an insult.And thus you can perhaps come to understand that some people don't like 4e for entirely valid and substantial reasons.But heck, here I am trying to let facts get in the way of a message board conversation, I'm sure that's gotta be against the rules of the Internet, if not ENWorld. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />"3e is a mess, while 4e is awesome!" will do that every time 'round here...If you think he's hopeless, use your ignore list.I think you've still got hope, or you would've been on it at the first mention of 3e killing your parents and griding them into chili that it made you eat. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification