Clark Peterson on 4E

Status
Not open for further replies.
I can respect positions like this, though in the end I think they are pointless unless they carry with them some "harder" evidence.

Someone can tell me "4e doesn't feel like dnd". But without a why, its hard to find a fix...unless the fix is to return to the "true dnd" and then create a new version from there.


Yeah absolutely.

It may be the case that small house rules could add the 'missing' flavour but without more specific criticisms it is impossible to tell.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I'm really confused with this behaviour...going from 4e supporter and apparently quite excited for 4e to "4e isn't D&D"

edit...nm after reading what he actually said instead of what people in the thread gave me the impression he said.

Meh...all power to him
 

I didn't see anyone comment on this. I hope we can discuss Clark's comments without a flamewar.

Basically, Clark says that "[4E] just isn't D&D to me".

His notion is to come up with a '4E that is still D&D'. Myself, I question whether this is necessary. Clark's favorite flavor of D&D is evidently 1E. I call that a respectable choice. So the question is... especially with OSRIC, the OGL and the resurgence of interest in old school gaming... why doesn't Necromancer just do 1E products and get it over with?

I'd be interested in their stuff if it wasn't written for new school systems.

Bless Clark's geeky heart!

I REALLY hope that he pulls it off as I feel that 3rd edition is way too complicated at high levels to be tons o' fun but really don't look at 4th edition as D&D.

My group has played it a few times and, while we enjoyed it as a tactical boardgame, we didn't "feel the love" for it in ANY way. It changed the core of the game far too much for us to consider it the next iteration of the world's most famous rpg.

I'm just being honest and don't wish to offend any who like 4th edition but all 6 players in my regular Saturday group were left scratching their heads wondering if all htat we saw of 4th edition was all that it had to offer...
 


This is strange. I can remember at least really one positive post about 4E prior to its release... and now this. Oh well, everyone is entitled to change their mind.
 

This is strange. I can remember at least really one positive post about 4E prior to its release... and now this. Oh well, everyone is entitled to change their mind.

You should read the thread. Clark is very positive about many aspects of 4e, and he still wants to suppport 4e. He does however, feel that 4e could be done better.
 

You should read the thread. Clark is very positive about many aspects of 4e, and he still wants to suppport 4e. He does however, feel that 4e could be done better.
Sorry, that's too much nuance for a discussion board. We're at war people. Pick a side.
 

You guys missed this part.

Look, this is not a product announcement. It isnt anything yet. It is me and Bill and Scott talking. And I threw the idea at Mona just briefly.

There is no GSL. I am bored. I wanted something to work on. So I decided to do this. It is just me screwing around.

What I want is a revised GSL and an ability to support 4E.

Lets not blow this out of proportion.

It sure would be fun though...

Clark
 

I'd be very interested to check it out if it does happen (though I can't forsee WoTC opening up the GSL to let Necromancer do anything of the sort). I'd love to see a system that keeps most of the core of 4e, but chucks out the power system and replaces it with separate subsystems for each class, just as we had in 3.x and now Pathfinder. It sounds a little like that's what Clark is getting at (at least when it comes to wizards).

You lost me at "separate subsystems."
 


Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top