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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 9844645" data-attributes="member: 29398">Fair enough, though I think you're in the minority on that. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Yes, it is a jaundiced view; because IME (both in-game and IRL) "teamwork" all too often consists of one person doing the thinking/planning and everyone else basically following orders.  And I neither accept nor follow orders well in the least, but at the same time don't always want to be the one doing the thinking/planning for anyone other than myself.If everyone thinking and acting for themselves is "total dysfunction" then so be it.  In a typical D&D game I'd far rather have that than have a navy-seal team where everyone does exactly what they're told when they're told; and usually the reality ends up at a variable point along the spectrum between those, depending on a bunch of factors rarely if ever the same twice.That said, what you refer to as total dysfunction in fact has one very important function: it's almost always the most entertaining and amusing type of play there is.I've heard "defender" and "striker" often enough as football (soccer) terms but never "leader"; that's a new one on me, and I've followed football on at least a casual basis for many a year.In terms of player-base, there wasn't much 2e left to crap on when 3e came out; and perhaps more notably 2e didn't crap on 1e or B/X/BECMI.  That's what made the 4e marketing strategy so jarring: it was a first, at least IME.I'd give this more credence had PF1 not proven the opposite a year later.  Those books were massive, and still sold pretty well ( I was at GenCon 2009 when PF1 was released, and you couldn't swing a cat without hitting someone holding a copy of that book!).Unfortunately, the attention span I was willing to give it was more along the line of nine days*, after which I turned away...and in some disappointment, I might add: the build-up and pre-release booklets had my hopes up somewhat that 4e - unlike 3e - could and would be a system I'd either be willing to adopt wholesale or could find acceptable with minimal kitbashing.  But, no such luck.* - or however long it took me to read through the three books and realize what I was - and wasn't - seeing.I don't remember what tech I had at the time but odds are very high it would have been too old/slow to run DDI, either then or soon after.  Further, I seem to recall all reports on their big digital initiative - was it Gleemax? - pointing to no end of bugs and glitches and problems, which didn't exactly make me eager to leap into anything digital WotC were doing.As for what else was missing other than some classes, my main recollections are of missing iconic monsters.And sure, I most likely could have run a short campaign with it.  But a short campaign was exactly what I didn't want at the time, as about 4-ish months before 4e came out I'd just started my latest long-running campaign (which is still going).</blockquote>

Verification