Clark Peterson on 4E

[D'karr]

As soon as someone comes up with an agreed upon all-encompassing definition of what exactly a roleplaying game is, then we can determine whether or not 4E is a roleplaying game. To me, whether it is or is not is less of a question than whether 4E is D&D. To me and many, many others, it isn't. I even gave it a shot when it came out. I took the time to read the books, I played a few games. At first it was fun, but the fun quickly turned to annoyance and eventually hostility. Powers are such an overriding, annoying, and poorly conceived mechanic that I really can't believe that they went forward with it. What were they smoking? The problem is that this wouldn't even be an issue if someone would have come out with 4E under the OGL. I don't think it would have been widely embraced, there would be few proseletyzers, and it would have died the quiet death it deserves. Instead the golden age of gaming has been turned to division and conflict. Good job WotC, and thanks.

You do crack me up...

 

[I'm A Banana]

you cannot say that 4E is not an RPG

You could say that 4e doesn't feel like an RPG, too you. By your (personal, subjective) opinion of what an RPG "is" or "should be."

In my reading, that was his intended meaning, regardless of the casual omission of the "IMHO" signifier.

Language is not pure.

 

[Firevalkyrie]

You could say that 4e doesn't feel like an RPG, too you. By your (personal, subjective) opinion of what an RPG "is" or "should be."

In my reading, that was his intended meaning, regardless of the casual omission of the "IMHO" signifier.

Language is not pure.

Language is not pure, no, but the general trend of linguistics over the long term is to allow more concepts to be expressed, and to broaden the number of concepts enveloped within a single term. And drawing a linguistic border to exclude an object from a class in which it should obviously be included is not a good use of language.

 

[xechnao]

Clark's a big boy, he can defend himself. He said nothing about characters, what he said is "changing a miniatures game back into a role-playing game." That is a statement - and a false one - because D&D 4th Edition is by any reasonably defensible definition of the term a role-playing game already.

Of the other things that he said, I find few of them attractive in any way at all. "Cheesy anime crap?" If there's a three-word phrase that REEKS of self-assumed superiority, it's that one right there (and try actually watching some anime sometime; there are a lot of anime series that can teach you more about storytelling, atmosphere and pacing than you ever realized you didn't know; I learned more about atmosphere and character from Cowboy Bebop than from some college-level classes on the subject). I've been watching anime for almost as long as I've been playing D&D and I don't see it. This has gone way too far. As far as I'm concerned, if you think my fun is badwrong, you are the one who needs an attitude adjustment.

Ok, so you want to go on saying that because we have dictionaries with these definitions you think Clark fails or better makes false statements. Well, no worthwhile comment I can make.

And this has gone way too far?
Clark or anyone else around here is not forcing you to buy his book or stop watching anime, nor does he force you to give up any rights of expression or creativity that allow you to make your game or flick the way you want. Furthermore you can still publically express what you find attractive or not attractive if you like. So whatever has gone too far, I still fail to see it.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Of course the AMHDotEL 4E would help D&D 4E. I suppose it also has good things to say about Shadowrun 4E, right?

But let's face it - the 4th edition of American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language lacks the soul of the OAHDotEL. It's AHDotEL in name only. You just have to look at the anime cover to see that. Anyone using the OAHDoTEL 4E is not really interested in speaking or writing English, he's just looking at a list of words without any flavor or meaning.

Sigged!

 

[Mallus]

As soon as someone comes up with an agreed upon all-encompassing definition of what exactly a roleplaying game is, then we can determine whether or not 4E is a roleplaying game.

It would more practical to agree upon then list a few defining characteristics of role-playing games and then determine if 4e should be characterized as such. Or is that too reasonable?

 

[I'm A Banana]

Language is not pure, no, but the general trend of linguistics over the long term is to allow more concepts to be expressed, and to broaden the number of concepts enveloped within a single term. And drawing a linguistic border to exclude an object from a class in which it should obviously be included is not a good use of language.

I was more making the case that what Clark actually typed might not give a clear indication of what Clark really meant to convey. I would hesitate to use the kind of exegesis that is going on in many posts in this thread to analyze whether he was right or wrong or lying or double-talking or misleading. It seemed very casual to me, not like some sort of well-rehearsed pronouncement of evidence of any sort. The word choice was incidental, not deliberate. It's the freakin' internet, on his own boards, to people who are obviously fans of his and the products that Necro puts out. It was not a speech for a politician in an election year. I think we can cut him some of what the SubGeniuses love.

All this dogpiling is going to do is probably assure that he won't be as eager to post his thoughts in the future, which would be (is?) something of a shame. The message of "If you can't say EXACTLY WHAT YOU MEAN AT ALL TIMES WITH PERFECT CLARITY, don't say anything at all!" is not a very constructive one in my view.

That's not to say it was a particularly inspired choice of words or whatever, but that is to say that people are making WAY too big of a deal about it, I think.

Clark has a personal preference for his games just like anyone else. 4e might not be that preference (though that doesn't mean he won't support it). I doubt 3e is that preference either. I wouldn't be surprised if he still plays a lot of 1e when there are sympathetic players around.

 

[Orcus]

I'm saying that him saying "this isn't a criticism of 4e" probably means that he wouldn't change 4e if he had the chance, that 4e is fine as it is, and that just because he has personal feelings about what he would see doesn't mean that 4e is wrong or bad or negative in any way.

He's not saying 4e is horrible because it has too much anime crap and is thus unworthy of any love.

I think he's more saying that 4e has too much "anime crap" for his personal tastes, perhaps. Not that he wouldn't support it given half a chance.

It sounded like he was spitballing, talking amongst friends, not making an argument so much as expressing a feeling, and very much qualifying that feeling by saying that it's not a real criticism. Personal feelings, after all, usually aren't criticism. 4e doesn't need to be defended against his personal views any more than Fruit Loops needs to be defended against someone's personal fear of cartoon parrots.

It certainly doesn't seem that he's somehow two-faced about it, to me. It's not very hypocritical to say "I think there are some problems with how 4e feels to me personally, not that those feelings are universal or should be assumed to be directly caused by 4e alone." This is my understanding of his post.

It's the internet, mang. If you're arguing about "what criticism is," you've probably taken the comment too seriously all ready.

That is an excellent summary of my views.

I was speaking very personally among friends. Some of the things I dont like might be great for most other people. I was speaking purely of my style of play and preferences. Heck, I think I said some of the same stuff about 3E. I mean, look at our moto, 3E rules, 1E feel. The problem with 4E is it will take a few rules changes to make 4E rules, 1E feel (which 3E didnt really require as much).

What I envision doing (and what I am doing as a personal project) is making a 4E supplement like Monte's Unearthed Arcana was for 3E. Alternate rules that have one goal: restoring 1E feel to D&D.

I dont hate 4E. I like it. I want to support it. One way I want to support it is to provide rules variants. I also want to make adventures. Whoever said I would do 4E stuff without any passion clearly doesnt know me. I'm all about passion. If I dont have passion for it, I wont do it. That has been our whole concept.

Clark

 

[Mallus]

My previous post was not to claim that it wasn't a roleplaying game. It is on some level...

Then you agree with me. Cool. I like being agreed with...

 

[Firevalkyrie]

That is an excellent summary of my views.

I was speaking very personally among friends. Some of the things I dont like might be great for most other people. I was speaking purely of my style of play and preferences. Heck, I think I said some of the same stuff about 3E. I mean, look at our moto, 3E rules, 1E feel. The problem with 4E is it will take a few rules changes to make 4E rules, 1E feel (which 3E didnt really require as much).

What I envision doing (and what I am doing as a personal project) is making a 4E supplement like Monte's Unearthed Arcana was for 3E. Alternate rules that have one goal: restoring 1E feel to D&D.

I dont hate 4E. I like it. I want to support it. One way I want to support it is to provide rules variants. I also want to make adventures. Whoever said I would do 4E stuff without any passion clearly doesnt know me. I'm all about passion. If I dont have passion for it, I wont do it. That has been our whole concept.

Clark

It's just, on some level you go "D&D's lost its soul" and I go "Whatchu talkin bout, Willis?" (yes, I know, I'm dating myself) Because to me, the soul of D&D - in terms of the game that the book gives you - has always been in killing things and taking their stuff, and 4E has that in spades. Everything else evolves from play at the table. Only now there's new and interesting ways for guys other than wizards to kill things and take their stuff, which I interpret as an absolute Good because I thought that some of the old ways to kill things and take their stuff was boring, and concentrating so many of the interesting and flavorful ways to kill things and take their stuff in one character gives too much of the spotlight to that guy, who also happens to be the one guy that traditional fantasy doesn't really focus on all that much.