Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9225806" data-attributes="member: 42582">As I posted, if you bought the book and felt ripped off that's one thing - though as I and [USER=6925338]@soviet[/USER] also posted, for anyone following the pre-release announcements it seemed obvious what sort of game 4e would be. I've just been looking through some old 2007/2008 ENworld threads about 4e, and the discussions - about hp, about "mechanics as physics", etc - are exactly the same back then, before the game was published, as they are now. Anyone who participated in those discussions being critical of non-"simulationist" design, and then bought 4e, hardly had any basis for complaint.But even for someone who did feel ripped off, that provides no reason to critique the play of the game via hypothetical examples that rely upon principles that the game manifestly eschews.So if I get asked to cards night, expecting bridge, and get poker, maybe I have a less-than-stellar evening. But I'm still not going to go home grumbling about how the taking and counting of the tricks was all messed up.</blockquote>