Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 5523322" data-attributes="member: 18280">I think both sides make good points, and (as is often the case) the truth lies somewhere in the middle.Somehow people manage to play D&amp;D without running into these problems.&nbsp; I am not a &quot;super DM&quot; by any means, and yet I somehow avoid it without making any real effort to do so.&nbsp; And my players, like Neonchameleon, are encouraged to do their best.Yet somehow this problem does seem to arise for some people.&nbsp; For more than it doesn't arise?&nbsp; No idea.&nbsp; But I suspect that there are real rules problems at the root of the issue.&nbsp; IMHO, it is probable that design elements have unintended knock-on effects that lead to this problem, such as a combat system that discourages &quot;non-essential&quot; combats (which in turn makes it easier for casters to go nuclear).In fact, long before 4e was a twinkle in Mike Mearls' eye (or at least, long before it was announced), I discussed some of the same here on EN World.&nbsp; (Of course, when 3e was the game of the day, I was told by a few vocal people that, essentially, I didn't know what I was talking about.)For those people who disagreed with me then, if you cast your mind back, you might understand why some disagree with you now.&nbsp; But, by the same light, I can certainly understand where you are coming from.&nbsp; IMHO, 3e added some real innovations and created some serious (but avoidable) problems by not thinking through the rammifications of change.3e certainly isn't alone in that.But then, no game is perfect.RC</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 5523322, member: 18280"] I think both sides make good points, and (as is often the case) the truth lies somewhere in the middle. [B][I]Somehow[/I][/B] people manage to play D&D without running into these problems. I am not a "super DM" by any means, and yet I somehow avoid it without making any real effort to do so. And my players, like Neonchameleon, are encouraged to do their best. Yet [B][I]somehow[/I][/B] this problem does seem to arise for some people. For more than it doesn't arise? No idea. But I suspect that there are real rules problems at the root of the issue. IMHO, it is probable that design elements have unintended knock-on effects that lead to this problem, such as a combat system that discourages "non-essential" combats (which in turn makes it easier for casters to go nuclear). In fact, long before 4e was a twinkle in Mike Mearls' eye (or at least, long before it was announced), I discussed some of the same here on EN World. (Of course, when 3e was the game of the day, I was told by a few vocal people that, essentially, I didn't know what I was talking about.) For those people who disagreed with me then, if you cast your mind back, you might understand why some disagree with you now. But, by the same light, I can certainly understand where you are coming from. IMHO, 3e added some real innovations and created some serious (but avoidable) problems by not thinking through the rammifications of change. 3e certainly isn't alone in that. But then, no game is perfect. RC [/QUOTE]

Verification