Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="D+1" data-source="post: 1314289" data-attributes="member: 13654">I assume that since 3E was RELEASED several years ago that you're actually referring to the state of affairs prior to that, and NOT, in fact, the last several years?You have misread and misunderstood.  It says nothing of the kind.  It suggests that miniatures are the best means to visualize the action, that the game assumes their use and is written from that standpoint.  It does NOT say that they are NECESSARY in order to even play.Show me where.  The rules are "inclusive" of the use of miniatures, not "exclusive".  If they are necessary why is there not an official line of miniatures for every d20 campaign setting (since clearly you would not be able to play those settings without miniatures if they are REQUIRED by the rules)?And like most fanatics you're blinded to realities because of your fanaticism.  You state that the minis orientation doesn't cause a problem for you, that the minis themselves are okay, yet you misread the reasoning behind their inclusion (and are apparantly unaware that MOST gamers used miniatures for D&D even before WotC started selling them), and you're bent out of shape that they are there at all while providing no substantive reason why that IS a bad thing.And that is CRIMINAL in its incomplete and inaccurate "paraphrasing".  It's one sentence entirely out of context.  Perhaps if you read, quoted from, and paraphrased the WHOLE introduction?  If you included the paragraphs on the same page, still under "Introduction", about Characters, and Adventures...?And doesn't apply to the players of the game in any way whatsoever.  It applies to people who wish to publish under the RULES that were and are still set forth and controlled by the company that made the game Open Source.  Open Source didn't just throw it all into public domain and make it a free-for-all.  If you believe that there should be nothing standing in the way of publishers bringing the game down into an orgy of pornographic sex and violence and actually CONFIRMING the dribble of zealots who have made otherwise specious claims about the game for 20 years, I can only say you're again mistaken.  Censorship is far from universally evil.And yet it doesn't make sense to you that they want to avoid that?  To head off such a problem before it arises?And again your baseless fanaticism against miniatures blinds you from considering that the closer inclusion of miniatures might in fact EXPAND the game's mass market appeal.Interesting.  I just DID by a new set of the 3.5 core books for friends after Wizards marked them down 40% as they close their retail stores.But your fears are founded on inaccuracies.  Monte Cook stated in his much discussed (at the time) rant/review of 3.5: "So, one has to surmise that the new business team determined that sales were slumping slightly earlier than predicted and needed 3.5 to come out earlier. One also has to surmise that someone -- at some level -- decided that it was to be a much, much more thorough revision than previously planned."The game was not "dying".  Sales were not plummeting.  They were "slumping" - and it was only earlier than expected, not UNexpected.  Now that's just Monte's view, and not being the guy with the numbers in his hands he wouldn't know for sure, but he was in a position to make educated assessments because he was there.You've succumbed to the disease of pointless fatalism that has plagued D&D players since the days of TSR.  The cure is a simple reality check because it's all in your head.</blockquote>

Verification