Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest&nbsp; 85555" data-source="post: 6078582"><p>I am not denying some people had complaints, nor am I saying the 4E approach is wrong. I am rejecting the idea that it is bad design. Some players might not like mechanics where GM interpretation matters. Others see it as an enormous feature. T me that is one of the reasons you have a GM in the first place. It is the strength of the rpg medium that you can have such mechanics. Clearly not everyone loves them,but neither that nor the fact that it is an established mechanic makes it bad. The fact that it was taking out of the game and you have large numbers of people comlplaining shows the mechanic was working just fine for many. To dismiss it as outdated or not modern enough, when these kinds of innovations met with such a mixed respnse in 4E, seems odd to me. I anything, I think it just shows there is a big split in the gaming community on what powers the GM should have and the workability of sujective mechanics like this. I totally get that some people dont want those things in the game, they view it as unfair or inconsistent. But that feeling isn't universal. And the constant appeal to "the needs of modern" design when people want something different from you in the game feels a bit like a rhetorical hammer.</p></blockquote><p></p>