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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 3803435" data-attributes="member: 4937">I'm with Geron here.  I think you have no measurement of what is sensible or better.  I certainly don't think, 'Nothing should be done like it was 40 years ago.' holds up to any sort of scrutiny.  That might have been a fashionable thing to believe 40 years go, but we are beginning to learn better.  The designer's changes are a set of tradeoffs.  They will get something, but they will lose something.  There are alot of ways that the great wheel is smarter than the 4e cosmology, one of which is that the great wheel cosmology presents a universe that is enherently balanced and doesn't tell you what to believe or how to play.  If there was a great vortex of chaos in Limbo, then there was a corresponding and equally weighty infinitely organized crystaline Nirvana on the other side.  The great wheel cosmology creates a geography of ideas and thoughts and beliefs that encourage the great strength of fantasy - that the abstract can be examined by making it tangible.   It's geography that says, 'This game can be about more than ego-stroking self-empowerment fantasies, but that it can look at good and evil in a serious way because its made good and evil tangible artifacts of the world and is asking the question so what would good and evil look like?'  Now, that isn't to say that there aren't other interesting cosmologies you could have, or even that some cosmologies couldn't be better thought out than others.  But as for showing that the 4e cosmology is smarter and better thought out than the one from 1e to 3e - no I don't think you can show that.  It might not be to your taste, but what is to your taste isn't necessarily smarter, better, or deeper by defination of being something you like.</blockquote>

Verification