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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest&nbsp; 85555" data-source="post: 8139539"><p>True but I still happily played 3E. I learned a lot about what I didn't like with that edition, but I played it. And I think it is very easy to encounter a frustration in a game, ask what the cause of that frustration is, then build a whole system of thought or a playstyle preference to avoid that cause. And I think that leads to overly extreme attitudes in playstyle (I know because I was locked in a "everything always has to be in character mindset". To Pemerton's point, many mechanics like this did exist earlier in the game to different degrees (and in the hobby in other RPG: and I grew up in a time when you just played lots of different RPGs, even D&D was the one you played most often because of its popularity). Also ones analysis of the 'cause' of frustration can be wrong, or slightly off. And all that can lead to a  throw the baby out with the bathwater approach to play. This is just my way of saying, I think what really matters is whether you like a specific instance of something. I wasn't particularly thrilled with Gather information and other social skills as they tended to be used in 3E. Removing them, largely fixed any issue I had (and being willing to pick up older editions of the game and play those, also fixed this problem). But I think building an idea around avoiding all instances of gather information like mechanics would, and was, misguided. To use an analogy, I wasn't into the powers system in 4E, especially for martial classes. But Barbarians used to be able to rage several times a day, and that didn't bother me. I think a lot of these things when they intrude lightly, won't bother most people. It is only when they become the heart of play that it can impact a playstyle you might be accustomed to (and perhaps a style of play you are not even aware you are engaging in)</p></blockquote><p></p>

Verification