Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 3911138" data-attributes="member: 22779">Actually, you usually argue the exact opposite of this, so, I'm left wondering when you changed your tune.&nbsp; You've frequently argued that 3e's implied setting and core assumptions make moving in any direction very, very difficult.&nbsp; Whether it's the inclusion of &quot;magic marts&quot; or &quot;high magic settings&quot;, you've repeatedly taken the stand that 3e actually is much more limiting than earlier editions since you cannot do what you want without several hundred pages of rewriting the system.In fact, for a system you are so ardently defending here as being broad enough to encapsulate many different concepts, why would you then feel the need to almost entirely rewrite the system to fit your own concept?&nbsp; But, I, like others here, would be interested in knowing what you see as being removed that would make things so much more difficult to do in 4e.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 3911138, member: 22779"] Actually, you usually argue the exact opposite of this, so, I'm left wondering when you changed your tune. You've frequently argued that 3e's implied setting and core assumptions make moving in any direction very, very difficult. Whether it's the inclusion of "magic marts" or "high magic settings", you've repeatedly taken the stand that 3e actually is much more limiting than earlier editions since you cannot do what you want without several hundred pages of rewriting the system. In fact, for a system you are so ardently defending here as being broad enough to encapsulate many different concepts, why would you then feel the need to almost entirely rewrite the system to fit your own concept? But, I, like others here, would be interested in knowing what you see as being removed that would make things so much more difficult to do in 4e. [/QUOTE]

Verification