Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Terramotus" data-source="post: 5626777" data-attributes="member: 7220">I'm a gearhead - I like rules, I like playing with the rules, I like building characters.&nbsp; I want a unified, coherent design.&nbsp; I'm going to assume anyone playing 4E wants a good rules-heavy system.&nbsp; If you don't you're doing it wrong - there are many other better systems out there for rules-lite play, such as Castles and Crusades, OSRIC, etc.Essentials isn't the worst design ever (though I don't think it has anything actually GOING for it either - it's poorly implemented), but it REALLY doesn't go with 4E.&nbsp; 4E is the most schizophrenic edition ever.&nbsp; Even when you &quot;break the rules&quot; and push the design further, you need to keep some elements the same, so it feels familiar.&nbsp; Essentials throws out everything but the basic math on the explicit rules, and ALL of the implied rules.&nbsp; Random-ass game design.And it doesn't create any new and interesting foundation of its own.&nbsp; Each class uses different ways of doing things.&nbsp; It's just weird, randomly built classes mutated out of 4E like some cancerous growth, where it uses familiar elements but everything is put together all wrong.At least if Essentials IS 5E they'll have to come up with some sort of consistent design and I can then decide if I want to buy in, instead of it de-facto replacing the existing design without even any admission that it's going to be doing so.4E was something interesting and its own.&nbsp; Some people want to make it into 1E or 2E or 3E, rather than just playing those games.&nbsp; Whatever.&nbsp; Essentials isn't its own thing - it's just a bizarre mutation.&nbsp; At least if WotC admitted 4E was done and that Essentials was 4.5, they would have had to express a coherent design for it, and I could have bowed out of the new product without watching for each new release, hoping that it was something for the game I actually played rather than this strange new game.Does that explain it?&nbsp; I don't care how 5E goes, but I suspect, at least, that it'll be coherent.Yeah, I agree.&nbsp; Without that, WTH is left?&nbsp; If there are no rules, you're not using exception-based design, you're using random design.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Terramotus, post: 5626777, member: 7220"] I'm a gearhead - I like rules, I like playing with the rules, I like building characters. I want a unified, coherent design. I'm going to assume anyone playing 4E wants a good rules-heavy system. If you don't you're doing it wrong - there are many other better systems out there for rules-lite play, such as Castles and Crusades, OSRIC, etc. Essentials isn't the worst design ever (though I don't think it has anything actually GOING for it either - it's poorly implemented), but it REALLY doesn't go with 4E. 4E is the most schizophrenic edition ever. Even when you "break the rules" and push the design further, you need to keep some elements the same, so it feels familiar. Essentials throws out everything but the basic math on the explicit rules, and ALL of the implied rules. Random-ass game design. And it doesn't create any new and interesting foundation of its own. Each class uses different ways of doing things. It's just weird, randomly built classes mutated out of 4E like some cancerous growth, where it uses familiar elements but everything is put together all wrong. At least if Essentials IS 5E they'll have to come up with some sort of consistent design and I can then decide if I want to buy in, instead of it de-facto replacing the existing design without even any admission that it's going to be doing so. 4E was something interesting and its own. Some people want to make it into 1E or 2E or 3E, rather than just playing those games. Whatever. Essentials isn't its own thing - it's just a bizarre mutation. At least if WotC admitted 4E was done and that Essentials was 4.5, they would have had to express a coherent design for it, and I could have bowed out of the new product without watching for each new release, hoping that it was something for the game I actually played rather than this strange new game. Does that explain it? I don't care how 5E goes, but I suspect, at least, that it'll be coherent. Yeah, I agree. Without that, WTH is left? If there are no rules, you're not using exception-based design, you're using random design. [/QUOTE]

Verification