Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5822387" data-attributes="member: 22779">But, not entirely unreasonable.&nbsp; There are a large number of times when someone says, &quot;But, 4e is like this...&quot; and there is clear, concise evidence that that isn't true.&nbsp; Not only isn't it true, but, it wasn't even true when the game was first released.But, critics still bring these things up.&nbsp; Why is the criticism automatically believed when the actual text of the game is not?Look at the little back and forth I just had with Dagger.&nbsp; Now, the claims that he made are pretty easy to, if not disprove, at least question.&nbsp; Saving throws for spellbooks?&nbsp; How many times would you have to get hit by area of effect attacks to actually lose your spellbook?&nbsp; Considering people keep telling me that AD&amp;D is this low magic game where you are mostly fighting humanoids, why is the wizard making so many saving throws?Wizards get their spells regularly disrupted?&nbsp; Really?&nbsp; Most humanoids don't carry ranged weapons on a regular basis (look at the Monster manual if you don't believe me), and very, very few monsters have any ranged attacks at all.&nbsp; Never mind that you cannot make ranged attacks if you are in melee combat, so, why isn't the fighter engaging the ranged attackers to free up the wizard.&nbsp; AND, as a final point, the wizard has to lose initiative before this is even an issue at all.&nbsp; The difference between the criticisms of 4e and what I'm doing here, is that I actually PLAYED 1e for ten years.&nbsp; I have a pretty decent working knowledge of the rules.&nbsp; Yet, quite clearly from the criticisms in this thread, people really don't have a decent working knowledge of 4e mechanics.&nbsp; So, questioning people's experience with the system is pretty valid IMO.&nbsp; I'd give much more weight to Lanefan's criticisms of AD&amp;D than mine (he knows that system FAR better than I do) and I'd give NeonChameleon's criticisms of the system far more weight than someone who's repeatedly been shown to not know the system very well.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 5822387, member: 22779"] But, not entirely unreasonable. There are a large number of times when someone says, "But, 4e is like this..." and there is clear, concise evidence that that isn't true. Not only isn't it true, but, it wasn't even true when the game was first released. But, critics still bring these things up. Why is the criticism automatically believed when the actual text of the game is not? Look at the little back and forth I just had with Dagger. Now, the claims that he made are pretty easy to, if not disprove, at least question. Saving throws for spellbooks? How many times would you have to get hit by area of effect attacks to actually lose your spellbook? Considering people keep telling me that AD&D is this low magic game where you are mostly fighting humanoids, why is the wizard making so many saving throws? Wizards get their spells regularly disrupted? Really? Most humanoids don't carry ranged weapons on a regular basis (look at the Monster manual if you don't believe me), and very, very few monsters have any ranged attacks at all. Never mind that you cannot make ranged attacks if you are in melee combat, so, why isn't the fighter engaging the ranged attackers to free up the wizard. AND, as a final point, the wizard has to lose initiative before this is even an issue at all. The difference between the criticisms of 4e and what I'm doing here, is that I actually PLAYED 1e for ten years. I have a pretty decent working knowledge of the rules. Yet, quite clearly from the criticisms in this thread, people really don't have a decent working knowledge of 4e mechanics. So, questioning people's experience with the system is pretty valid IMO. I'd give much more weight to Lanefan's criticisms of AD&D than mine (he knows that system FAR better than I do) and I'd give NeonChameleon's criticisms of the system far more weight than someone who's repeatedly been shown to not know the system very well. [/QUOTE]

Verification