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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="N'raac" data-source="post: 6199038" data-attributes="member: 6681948">To me, it is common sense to assume that the lack of an explicit statement of what playstyle it supports means the authors have not indicated what playstyle the game supports. Should I assume it supports a game surrounding farming and marketing vegetables? Where does it say that this playstyle is not supported?Since you have never sat at my table, and never will, I doubt you are qualified to assess my DMing style. You have indicated "helpful" equals "always gives me what I want". Is that how parents behave to children? Should we assume they are at some lower level of reaction than "helpful"? A drug addict wants his fix. He does not want intervention. Which one will a "friend" or a "helpful attitude" person provide?Allow me - this is the most I can highlight it for you - I hope you will be able to find it now.I don't believe the Pope's job includes lectures on comparative religion, nor listening to someone preach Taoism. As to the job of a chamberlain:To think I was previously unaware London had its own monarch, or that NYC had one until the early 1900's. You really DO learn something new every day!Guess they must have made their diplomacy check on the guard, so who am I to prevent them bothering the Chamberlain.Having been "Diplomacied" to a helpful attitude, he will attempt to help them. See examples above where what you want and what you need are not the same thing.I'm not referencing character classes, and I see no indication all PC's are Nobles.Certain mechanics are conducive to certain playstyles. That's been the topic of a large portion of this thread. If the game is modified to better suit one playstyle, and becomes less suited to another, the former will be happier and the latter less so.I'd like to thank you for your consideration in addressing points in their context. I really WOULD like to...I'm not going back to count, but I'm pretty sure the "more than one minute" diplomacy rule has been mentioned WAY more times than this has.That worked out so well that WoTC has continued their unbounded support for 4e, and have indicated no intention of updating it at any time in the foreseeable future, right? Clearly it took the gaming world by storm!koffessentialskoff koffD&DnextkoffNasty cough, that.Let's look at objective facts:1977 - AD&D released (over 3 years)1989 - AD&D 2nd Ed released - 11 years later 2000 - 3e released - another 11 years later2008 - 4e released (8 years this time)2013/2014 - 5e to be released when, exactly? I bet it doesn't get delayed until 2016.So which one is the shortest-lived edition, then? OD&D, I suppose, it only lasted a few years before AD&D and Basic came along.Now, that doesn't mean one is better (look at TV runs for evidence of "good" not translating into "longevity"), but it does make it pretty clear whether "enough people" wanted 4e to make it the Golden Edition of Hasbro.</blockquote>

Verification