Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kzach" data-source="post: 4392600" data-attributes="member: 56189">There is only one definition. And no, I don't believe it's arrogant to say that.The system as presented is complete.Just because it doesn't include elements you like or see as fitting into a standard fantasy milieu does not make it an incomplete system.This contradicts itself.In the first sentence you essentially state that there is "one true fantasy concept". In the next you concede that there are multiple types of fantasy and that this system simply doesn't represent your own version.If there really was one true version of fantasy, then you could argue that by not including certain elements of that version, that 4e is incomplete. But there simply isn't one true version.By your definition, 1e was incomplete because it didn't include a bunch of classes until Unearthed Arcana. By your definition, 3.0 was incomplete because it had stuff-all prestige classes in the core books.Your definition of what fantasy is, does not constitute a complete version of fantasy. 4e is a complete system, it's not really a disputable fact. That it doesn't include elements you feel should be included in standard fantasy fare, does not make it incomplete. It simply makes it not suited to your tastes (until a splatbook is presented which completes your version).</blockquote>