Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Howndawg" data-source="post: 3711437" data-attributes="member: 54639">One thing you'll notice if you look at the history of the game is that with every new edition of D&amp;D, new gamers are brought into the fold and old ones leave.&nbsp; This is in part because not only does each new edition improve upon the system, but also because each new edition has a different design philosophy as well.&nbsp; First edition focused strongly on a quasi-medieval setting (Greyhawk) and the game relected on this.&nbsp; Second Edition tried to expand upon the fantasy horizons and opened up the game to settings which were not medieval in the least.&nbsp; Third tried to get back to a core emphasis on a common gaming experience but with the medievalism downplayed.&nbsp; It looks like Fourth is trying to expand the game beyond a uniform way of doing things but without the competing game lines that sunk TSR in the nineties.&nbsp; This philosophy could bring back Planescape and Dark Sun fans (among others) who abandoned the game when 3E came out.&nbsp; I like 3.x rules.&nbsp; They are on the whole the best D&amp;D rules ever.&nbsp; However, I do not care for the design philosophy behind 3E.&nbsp; Dungeon Punk makes me want to throw up and I hate having a CR system designed around how much gear the players have.4E is necessary to expand the appeal of D&amp;D to new players and ex players alike, hopefully without alienating any current players.&nbsp; If done right this objective would give D&amp;D a good shot in the arm, which it needs at the moment.&nbsp; If done wrong, well...Hope I didn't ramble too much.Howndawg</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Howndawg, post: 3711437, member: 54639"] One thing you'll notice if you look at the history of the game is that with every new edition of D&D, new gamers are brought into the fold and old ones leave. This is in part because not only does each new edition improve upon the system, but also because each new edition has a different design philosophy as well. First edition focused strongly on a quasi-medieval setting (Greyhawk) and the game relected on this. Second Edition tried to expand upon the fantasy horizons and opened up the game to settings which were not medieval in the least. Third tried to get back to a core emphasis on a common gaming experience but with the medievalism downplayed. It looks like Fourth is trying to expand the game beyond a uniform way of doing things but without the competing game lines that sunk TSR in the nineties. This philosophy could bring back Planescape and Dark Sun fans (among others) who abandoned the game when 3E came out. I like 3.x rules. They are on the whole the best D&D rules ever. However, I do not care for the design philosophy behind 3E. Dungeon Punk makes me want to throw up and I hate having a CR system designed around how much gear the players have. 4E is necessary to expand the appeal of D&D to new players and ex players alike, hopefully without alienating any current players. If done right this objective would give D&D a good shot in the arm, which it needs at the moment. If done wrong, well... Hope I didn't ramble too much. Howndawg [/QUOTE]

Verification