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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nemesis Destiny" data-source="post: 5431888" data-attributes="member: 98255">I avoid the official forum like the plague that it is for a reason. It's almost as bad as a Blizzard forum <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=";)" />Yes, I can see that this may be happening, and I recognise that some will be upset by it, but if anything, moving splatbook content to Dragon will better allow for older-style 4e alongside E-style stuff. Consider how much page space printing all those powers took up compared to the class feature with progression format that E-classes use. I can understand why they'd want to get away from that.At the end of the day, much of the blame can be laid at the feet of something you touch upon in your last sentence: optics. It looks bad. For some.Hah, now we have 'classic 4e' grognards? The term is beginning to lose all meaning.You are most likely correct... but it doesn't mean I have to stop trying to play peacemaker.Symbolically, yes, I think that's true, but it doesn't mean that support for older classes won't materialize at some future point.This is the crux of the problems. This divide; I don't understand it.Actually, that's not true. I understand why on both counts. Essentials-only folks are trying to strip away the 2.5 years of crufty Dragon and splatbook feats and powers. In so doing, I believe they're throwing out the baby with the bathwater, but it's an easy call to make.The No Essentials Allowed crowd, OTOH, seems to be suffering from a case of fear of the unknown. Most of the threads I've seen where DMs say they won't allow it, they've not even read it. They just say 'no' on general (misguided) principle. They think there's too much power creep, or that somehow by allowing more options to their players that things will be ruined, or that the two are different 'systems' and not compatible. This is the argument I don't understand. Considering that [I think] Mearls has said that Essentials design informs class structure "going forward" (how I hate that term), I'd say this is a foregone conclusion. Maybe there will be a nod to older design. Maybe a bone will be thrown. I'd be happy with either, honestly.Can't argue with you here. We aren't arguing, really, anyway, but I agree. Runepriest, Seeker, and Artificer could use some more love. I'd like to see it.Crux Point Two, right here. Predictability. A lot of folks are upset because it isn't what they were used to, and more still because they expected things to continue along the garden path of class splats and then race splats and a smattering of fluffy books. I see why this is disconcerting to some, but frankly, I was kind of tired of the splat mentality, myself.Don't get me wrong, I like new/more options as much as the next guy, but it really started to feel like they were dragging things out for the sake of dragging things out, so they could release another book. Frankly, splats or not, they're still doing this. I want my options presented in greater completeness from the start, damnit! Variations on those themes can come later.They've shown Enchanters, Evokers, and Illusionists, but clearly already had concepts for the other "classical" schools of magic in the works, as evidenced in some of the Redbox powers and HoS. The degree to which they drag this kind of thing out is frankly painful. There are still characters from past editions that I can't legally make yet. Two and a half years in.Like I pointed out, this is a combination of optics, and... what do you even call the closed-minded no-E/all-E divide? I liken it to D&D NIMBY-type behaviour.I would hardly call DS a splatbook; it's an entire campaign setting. Sure, it doesn't come in a box, but that doesn't make it a splat.I think one of the reasons that DS was so acclaimed is that 4e was a perfect way to express the nuances of the setting. I looked at it in 2e when it came out, and I wasn't impressed. It seemed like something designed to appeal to munchkins, at the time. 3e was too shiney for DS. But now, 4e, it has what it takes to represent such a setting properly.When they announced DS for 4e I actually got excited. I don't use campaigns, as I homebrew most of the time, but DS got my juices flowing, as it were. I still planned to use it in my campaign as a drop-in, and with alterations, but I still planned to use it. Most of the other stuff, like Eberron and FR, I can't. Too big, too detailed. DS is perfect though.Perhaps, but it will be because that's what they want to make of it. It will serve as their scapegoat, their sacrificial lamb. A quote from a song seems appropriate here, "Life is what you make it, and if you make it death, then rest your soul."</blockquote>

Verification