Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Sacrosanct" data-source="post: 8137861" data-attributes="member: 15700">I know <a href="https://thegrognardfiles.com/?fbclid=IwAR2DljRQcBHqEULK3vFi__B3EAh7v6erDIbncjPuD_lqQjfZ7BeIGBdW7qM" target="_blank">this is a couple months old, but well worth the listen</a>.&nbsp; It's an interview with Lew Pulsipher.&nbsp; In case you don't know, Lew is an iconic award winning game designer who has been there since day 1.&nbsp; Some of his more recognizable contributions to D&amp;D are the elemental princes of Evil as they appeared in Fiend Folio.&nbsp; Start at around the 19 minute mark for the commentary I'm referring to.Note: This is not meant to be an edition war.&nbsp; Rather, it's one person's feelings on how each edition felt to them and how they expected the game of D&amp;D to feel to them.&nbsp; It illustrates how we all have different preferences and expectations about how the game is to be played, and neither is right or wrong, just different.One thing that really stood out to me was how for Lew, one of the biggest expectations for D&amp;D is that it's a team based game, and when he talks about 4e, he felt that despite the things he didn't like about 4e, it brought back that team aspect that 3e got away from.&nbsp; And his discussion about his opinions on higher level play, party size, etc were very interesting.&nbsp; And how in his observation, people with video gaming backgrounds tend to focus on the end game (destination) rather than the journey itself, due to how fast&nbsp; you level in video games, and how that has impacted the game itself over editions.Anyway, I found this a fascinating listen to hear his perspective of how the game grew and changed from edition to edition, and from generation to generation.&nbsp; Agree or disagree, his perspective is well worth hearing, and he certainly seems to have a well researched argument for his positions.&nbsp; For example, large parties never really set well with me even back in the day, but I can totally understand where Lew is coming from when he talks about that.For me, having started fairly early in the lifecycle of D&amp;D in 1981, it was interesting to hear this, and while there is nothing wrong with how the game is played today, knowing how it was originally played and has grown over the years really helps put everything else into perspective and context.&nbsp; There's a certain level of appreciation gained there.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Sacrosanct, post: 8137861, member: 15700"] I know [URL='https://thegrognardfiles.com/?fbclid=IwAR2DljRQcBHqEULK3vFi__B3EAh7v6erDIbncjPuD_lqQjfZ7BeIGBdW7qM']this is a couple months old, but well worth the listen[/URL]. It's an interview with Lew Pulsipher. In case you don't know, Lew is an iconic award winning game designer who has been there since day 1. Some of his more recognizable contributions to D&D are the elemental princes of Evil as they appeared in Fiend Folio. Start at around the 19 minute mark for the commentary I'm referring to. [B]Note: This is not meant to be an edition war. Rather, it's one person's feelings on how each edition felt to them and how they expected the game of D&D to feel to them. It illustrates how we all have different preferences and expectations about how the game is to be played, and neither is right or wrong, just different.[/B] One thing that really stood out to me was how for Lew, one of the biggest expectations for D&D is that it's a team based game, and when he talks about 4e, he felt that despite the things he didn't like about 4e, it brought back that team aspect that 3e got away from. And his discussion about his opinions on higher level play, party size, etc were very interesting. And how in his observation, people with video gaming backgrounds tend to focus on the end game (destination) rather than the journey itself, due to how fast you level in video games, and how that has impacted the game itself over editions. Anyway, I found this a fascinating listen to hear his perspective of how the game grew and changed from edition to edition, and from generation to generation. Agree or disagree, his perspective is well worth hearing, and he certainly seems to have a well researched argument for his positions. For example, large parties never really set well with me even back in the day, but I can totally understand where Lew is coming from when he talks about that. For me, having started fairly early in the lifecycle of D&D in 1981, it was interesting to hear this, and while there is nothing wrong with how the game is played today, knowing how it was originally played and has grown over the years really helps put everything else into perspective and context. There's a certain level of appreciation gained there. [/QUOTE]

Verification