Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aberzanzorax" data-source="post: 4777293" data-attributes="member: 64209">It seems I was not misunderstanding and just not in agreement with the majority of the posters before me. I quoted the above for two reasons.  1. It states what I wanted to state, but much more succinctly. 2. The second part. I got into D&D loving the idea of magic, and having read and watched lots of fantastical, but very little fantasy. I'm in agreement with Umbran that you don't NEED to be familiar with the inspiration to enjoy/get into the game. Even now, my friends try to get me to read fantasy, but it doesn't seem to happen much. I've read here and there, but actually prefer to read rulebooks/game supplements. I get my stories from my imagination and from movies. Frankly, and I know I may be blaspheming here, I HATE the lord of the rings books. I find them boring, not focused enough on characters, plot, or events, and not particularly well written. That said, I do find that there is some GREAT fantasy out there that I much admire and enjoy as fine and interesting stories as well as good literature.  A third point unrelated to the quote above, but bringing in most of the thread before my last post: If these are the sources that people think lead to 4e d&D, no wonder there is such a schism in the consumer base. While I love steampunk, and I even love d20 steampunk (Iron Kingdoms anyone), I have to say, it just isn't D&D. I find it absurd that others would suggest that it is (but that's my opinion, and it's based on what I have come to know D&D to be based on looking at the prior editions and my own experiences). I don't mean to say that equating D&D with steampunk is foolish or wrong per se. But I do think there are limits based on history and even the name of the game that make Steampunk a bit of an outlier, at best.  How far could we take this? If you liked "The Fast and the Furious" you'll love D&D? It has action and excitement just like stealing cars and racing them...just with wizards and knights...oh, and Dragons and Dungeons.  I'm not trying to be rude at all. But as with my other post, I feel as if I'm not just looking at the same picture with different lenses, but at a different picture that was rendered in a different medium, with different lenses, and from a different angle and distance. I can't relate in the slightest here.  Edit: I notice that different people have different ideas of what D&D is. That's cool, and to be expected. I do wonder, though... do people who embrace 4e have a more "modernist" perspective on adventure? I'm personally not a huge fan of it, and I also feel like a dissenting voice regarding the genre splitting that I'm seeing here. I wonder if 4e does a fair bit of genre splitting itself, which is one reason (or maybe even THE reason) I have troubles with it? Do the people who think that Meiville's work (or steampunk/weird tech) is appropriate as an "influence" on D&D believe that's true for all editions, or see that as a (perhaps positive) change in the most recent edition?</blockquote>

Verification