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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hanez" data-source="post: 5779348" data-attributes="member: 82160">I dont mean to be uncivil.... but....I think that this is the fault of the designers of 4e.  Honestly.It is going to be very hard to unite people with sooo different expectations.  There are soooo many differences and you know honestly, I sympathise with people who love 4e and expect some of what they love to be carried into the new edition.   But for some people (like me), the game had gotten to the point that it was no longer recognizable  and maybe its just trademark law that is the problem?  Cause in the end I am ended up arguing that there are archetypes in D&D, or that mages should act like D&D mages always have, or welll.... I don't think I am being unreasonable.  In fact I know I am, I am just saying what I need to care about D&D again.  WOTC decidided to make this announcement, not me.  I was fine playing a different game (and callind it D&D), and forgetting about WOTC.   But they said they are trying for Unity, and I'm just here speakining the truth the way I see it.So, if your scratching your head, wondering why Save or Die, or Vancian, or Magic ItemsL, or the fact that Paizo was sooo damn incredible with my Dungeon subscrtion and issues like that are so contentious, I think its only reasonable to blame designers who kicked sooo much sand in previous players faces.   They made two groups of players, and that was there choice. .   And its goin  be a real challenge to join them back together, and people are just stating the rules that they see as a prerequisite for "unity". I honestly wish them luck.PS, theres a difference between civility (aka your a *****) and "your just not willing to budge".  Some things, I am not willing to budge on, and I hope the designers know that.   I convinced 12 players to jump to 4e, we sooooold our stuff.  We burnt more then a year on what they told us was D&D, we tried and they were wrong so there are some elements that we are not willing to budge on.  I think that's reasonable.Other then "not willing to budge" I hope we all keep civil <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=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification