Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="billd91" data-source="post: 6282171" data-attributes="member: 3400">SO you're saying there aren't a lot of people who like the drider change? Is it not possible for there to be a lot on either side of that coin?And of course it's not edition warring. Criticism of changes in an edition do not equal edition warring. And of course specific arguments apply in specific cases but a bit of good observation will notice a few trends about them. How orcs look - that's pretty much cosmetic. The look of orcs has varied considerably throughout D&amp;D history depending on who's doing the art. Everyone's got their favorites, but the look very rarely defines the essence of the creature. Shifting from lawful evil in 1e to &quot;often CE&quot; in 3e isn't that much of a change either. They're still evil and still bullies. The specifics of their philosophical approach to violence and bullying is of relatively minor importance, particularly since the qualifier &quot;often&quot; is a weak one.Whether or not the drider is a curse - that's a more substantial matter. That aspect even made it into one of RA Salvatore's drow novels. A more fundamental aspect of the creature has been changed than just how it looks and what philosophy of evil it espouses.Frankly, I find the whole idea of lumping all changes together as if they're all the same or of the same significance to be intellectually dishonest. There aren't that many people out here approaching the game that way.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="billd91, post: 6282171, member: 3400"] SO you're saying there aren't a lot of people who [b]like[/b] the drider change? Is it not possible for there to be a lot on either side of that coin? And of course it's not edition warring. Criticism of changes in an edition do not equal edition warring. And of course specific arguments apply in specific cases but a bit of good observation will notice a few trends about them. How orcs look - that's pretty much cosmetic. The look of orcs has varied considerably throughout D&D history depending on who's doing the art. Everyone's got their favorites, but the look very rarely defines the essence of the creature. Shifting from lawful evil in 1e to "often CE" in 3e isn't that much of a change either. They're still evil and still bullies. The specifics of their philosophical approach to violence and bullying is of relatively minor importance, particularly since the qualifier "often" is a weak one. Whether or not the drider is a curse - that's a more substantial matter. That aspect even made it into one of RA Salvatore's drow novels. A more fundamental aspect of the creature has been changed than just how it looks and what philosophy of evil it espouses. Frankly, I find the whole idea of lumping all changes together as if they're all the same or of the same significance to be intellectually dishonest. There aren't that many people out here approaching the game that way. [/QUOTE]

Verification