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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="seregil" data-source="post: 6229224" data-attributes="member: 38425">You know, Hershel, from the beginning of this thread, you have been making sweeping generalizations putting down people.In your opinion, only a very vocal minority of people didn't like FR4e and their only credit is that they are loud.Then, of course, you dismiss any knowledgeable testimony supporting the idea that FR4e had issues/poor implementation as sour grapes but somehow embrace any similar testimony supporting your point of view as holy writ.Then, there is this quote above.Kinda strange, because the very vocal minority in THIS thread is YOU, the guy who seems to have sour grapes is YOU and the person who seems to think someone is a "stand up guy" when the person supports your ideas is YOU.Example? The fact that the people who KNOW how FR 4e fared say it needs to be fixed is attributed to "their need to bring everyone together". To you, it's an after-the-fact justification instead of the very reason why they are doing it. They couldn't POSSIBLY be telling the truth: FR4e fared poorly and was not well received. They're LYING! so says Hershel!Tell ya what, when you can support/PROVE your allegations, I'll listen to you. Until then, the people in the know and their actions seem to indicate that <ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">FR4e is/was broken and needs to be fixed. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The decision to "fix" FR was based on it being broken. </li> </ul>Until you can demonstrate/support bad faith on their part, I will assume that "broken" justified "fixing it" instead of the position you seem to be supporting where "need to sell more books" justified "saying it's broken".You seem to be mad that the "unwashed masses" didn't agree with you and a product you seemed to like tanked. Well, I'm sorry. The masses have voted with their feet/$$$ and left FR 4e in droves. You might disagree, as is your right, but WOTC is a company that, to survive, must follow the desires of their clients and, based on Wyatt/Salvatore/Greenwood 's comments in the videos above, the need to roll back/fix FR4e is clear to them thus supporting the premise that FR4e did NOT succeed.Unless, of course, you can point us all to any (recent) evidence to the contrary?EDIT: I might also add that I left FR back in 2e when I had a pathological need to follow the meta-plot and the glut of FR books was driving me mad and making me broke. I came back to FR when I had matured to the point where I could "let go" of the need to buy everything and simply have a short, well defined list of source material and ignore the rest. It's also on of the reasons why I like PF: it's the end result of DND 3.5.It's stable, if you will, and I won't have to buy any more books. It's already been "fixed"</blockquote>

Verification