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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pawsplay" data-source="post: 3786149" data-attributes="member: 15538">It's not that I feel all the changes are just arbitrary. It's more a matter of, "This is what we want to do with X," it being predestined that X is changing. The reason X is changing? Someone put it on the block for 4e, since everything is fair game. 3e was explicitly a reboot, but it was a faithful re-envision. For 4e, they've apparently decided that it's okay to finally create something really new and call it D&D. Maybe it is time. But I don't know what such a thing is for. I already own several great books that are "not D&D" that I can run good fantasy games with. The essence of 3.5 was improvement on the game. Just about every way in which they retooled settings (more magic items in Greyhawk, mucking about with Realms material) caused some fairly stiff resistance; however much it might have theoretically improved play, it reduced value for people already invested in the setting. New mechanics, howevers, were basically always welcome as long as they worked. Prestige classes were a brilliant idea in that they were mandatory; by defalt, encouraged, but a DM could say, "No, that's not right for my game," without having to defend it much more strongly than that. That's quite a bit different than, "That Fiendish Codex you just bought? It's now part of an alternate universe no longer in print. Greyhawk? Variant campaign setting with different core races." and so forth. Somebody decided it was time to change the d&D experience rather than refine it. So be it. But I don't have to like it.</blockquote>

Verification