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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nemesis Destiny" data-source="post: 5756367" data-attributes="member: 98255">By far, my very favourite 3.x book. That and Monte's Cook's Books of Experimental Might. That, to me, is the way an RPG should be built. You pick what you want, ignore what you don't.Not only is that a patently ridiculous thing to say, the second half of the statement is pretty insulting.For what its worth, this is still generally possible, albeit with slightly more than minimal tweaking. Many, many people who run 4e do so with materials dating back to 1e.In fact, Chris Perkins has just released his revamp of the Gygax classic 'Steading of the Hill Giant Chief" in Dragon, and according to him, it's not all that different from the original. It took some work, yes, but remember this is publishable quality. With a few scribbled notes and some new monster stat blocks, it's a lot less daunting.I know quite a few gamers who would beg to differ (on either or both points). In fact there are still a lot of folks playing AD&D.I personally agree that 2e's time was up, I wanted something fresh, and I liked 3e at first (art direction and writing tone aside) but it wore out its welcome as soon as I ran a game past the low double-digit levels. The release of 3.5 did nothing to help that, which, to me, is the OPPOSITE of something that WORKED.I beg to differ. Most of my group was very done with 3.x, and I knew other groups in the same boat. One of the DMs in my group literally quit DMing because of 3rd ed, and nearly the entire hobby. We were actively "shopping around" for another fantasy game that pushed all the right buttons. I was tired of Wizards and their endless gravy train of supplements, each more broken than the last.I was pushing pretty hard for Pathfinder, myself. I'd downloaded the beta in PDF, read it, and thought it was pretty good (in retrospect, I don't think they fixed enough of 3.x's problems, but that's another story). I also liked E6 quite a lot. Then, one of our group said, "hey guys, I know that you all think WotC is the devil, but how about we give 4e a try?"It went over like a lead balloon. It took him weeks of lobbying just to get us to agree to play one session. We did, in the end, and the rest is history. Looks terrible on paper, but we really liked the way it played. Particularly the part about it being only as "gamey" as you want it to be. It still felt like D&D to us. All the stuff we hated on paper isn't all the visible in play. And the balance it brought, the DMing support, and so much less fiddling with millions of rules left more time for the stuff that matters to us - roleplaying.So to suggest that people that switched did so out of "blind loyalty" to either WotC or the D&D brand, is pretty damned far from the mark.</blockquote>

Verification