Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 4622801" data-attributes="member: 48965">I think D&D 3e had it right actually, and that is exactly why it had such a large following (and 4e seems to have split the fanbase so much).  3e gave us a game that may not have appealed as much to those who really wanted it's focus to be sharper and more narrow... but it more than made up for this in being much more capable in accommodating other play styles, add in the fact that it's the most common and well known of rpg's and you have a winner.  Thus yes everyone had to tweak it to get exactly what they wanted... but everyone could find something within it that appealed to them and that they enjoyed and it was worth it because hey, everyone plays D&D. 4e has changed so that it no longer appeals to a certain portion of it's fanbase, it just isn't fun for them and it's so far away from what they want that many feel by the time they get it to that point it won't be worth it.  I also feel like this is why many don't see 4e as any type of evolutionary step.Oh yeah, and D&D is still a generic fantasy roleplaying game... in fact with it's nebulous setting and breaking of most of D&D's tropes...I'd say it's more "generic" than it's been in awhile.  The problem is that it's changed the playstyles that it supports well, not that it has or hasn't become generic.</blockquote>