Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pentius" data-source="post: 5656523" data-attributes="member: 6676736">RE: Heavily Supported FR vs. Broad Brush Stroke FR.The big problem with this divide, in my experience, isn't the divide between the Dm and their edition of choice's level of FR support.  I mean, I'm with Scribble in that I find it hard to ignore published canon, but if you like published canon or have an easier time ignoring, good for you.  The problem is that there are two main types of FR fan: the canon nut, who loves having and reading umpteen sourcebooks, novels and playing all the games, and then you have the fan who loves the thematics, the conceptual ideas behind it, and doesn't want to read all that as opposed to letting their imagination do it.  For most FR groups, that'll be fine, but if you're a DM who just wants the broad strokes, god help you unless every single one of your players is the same way.I get where you're coming from, but I don't it find as depressing.  4e has more of a history to catch up to(and thanks to 2e, they'll probably never get every setting updated).  2e didn't have 11(?) years of 2e history or 8 years of 3.x history to answer to.  In addition, 2e was out for so much longer than 4e has been, that they had the time to make all those settings.  If 4e runs for a decade, I'm sure we'll see plenty of new stuff.</blockquote>