Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 5594246" data-attributes="member: 29398">Spoken like a true warrior.Crappy?&nbsp; Backwards?&nbsp; Progress?&nbsp; All subjective opinions, and all open to debate and disagreement.Without diving into ghastly Forge-isms, it's pretty easy to see the swing from story-driven (or imagination-driven) to gameplay-driven (or rules-driven) as you look at the evolution from 2e to 3e to 4e.&nbsp; Pushing the pendulum back the other way a bit *can* be done through a combination of design and presentation; and thus is a legitimate design goal.&nbsp; It is also a worthy one. Where instead you would do...what, exactly?There are really only two things that make an edition what it is:1. Design.&nbsp; This is where we all try to have some input, or at least we go through the motions and hope for the best, and hope the actual designers listen to us as a bloc if not as individuals.2. Presentation.&nbsp; This is completely out of our control.&nbsp; If the game is presented (by how the rules and books are written) and marketed as all-combat-all-the-time then guess what?&nbsp; That's how it'll be played.&nbsp; But if it's presented as something more; as being capable of combat, story, imagination, world design, exploration, etc. etc. - in other words, as being versatile - then more people will find it suitable for the game they want to play.&nbsp; Which by extension means more people wil buy it. It's not just 4e.&nbsp; 3e had the same problem.&nbsp; So did 1e, though to nowhere near the same extent.Lan-&quot;it's not D+D until I can roleplay getting drunk in a Norse town somewhere&quot;-efan</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 5594246, member: 29398"] Spoken like a true warrior. Crappy? Backwards? Progress? All subjective opinions, and all open to debate and disagreement. Without diving into ghastly Forge-isms, it's pretty easy to see the swing from story-driven (or imagination-driven) to gameplay-driven (or rules-driven) as you look at the evolution from 2e to 3e to 4e. Pushing the pendulum back the other way a bit *can* be done through a combination of design and presentation; and thus is a legitimate design goal. It is also a worthy one. Where instead you would do...what, exactly? There are really only two things that make an edition what it is: 1. Design. This is where we all try to have some input, or at least we go through the motions and hope for the best, and hope the actual designers listen to us as a bloc if not as individuals. 2. Presentation. This is completely out of our control. If the game is presented (by how the rules and books are written) and marketed as all-combat-all-the-time then guess what? That's how it'll be played. But if it's presented as something more; as being capable of combat, story, imagination, world design, exploration, etc. etc. - in other words, as being versatile - then more people will find it suitable for the game they want to play. Which by extension means more people wil buy it. It's not just 4e. 3e had the same problem. So did 1e, though to nowhere near the same extent. Lan-"it's not D+D until I can roleplay getting drunk in a Norse town somewhere"-efan [/QUOTE]

Verification