Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Cadence" data-source="post: 6030913" data-attributes="member: 6701124">My current extended group over the past 15 years has had a few dozen members and probably has at least one person who's tried most of the games out there, and has used at least five non-D&amp;D systems over that time... D&amp;D has been used for the majority of sessions though.&nbsp; Does that make us role-players or D&amp;D players?&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; Anyway, I think the problem 4e had for us is that it wasn't competing against 3.5, but against&nbsp; our house-ruled 3.5... and so, fallacy or not, I think 4e is the favorite D&amp;D of only one or two of the group.&nbsp; &nbsp; As far as things 4e does worse, I think one of the bigger ones for me is how it presented the skill challenge resolution and the non-combat part of the game.&nbsp;&nbsp; Your posts (and those of several others) on the threads have encouraged me to take the time to revisit them.&nbsp;&nbsp; Similarly, I wish it made the rules for skills, professions, and crafts (in whatever form) sound more important.&nbsp;&nbsp; As noted by other posters, the 3.5 rules don't actually make some of those much more than money making tokens... but they strike me as having some symbolism beyond that.World building issuess tie into my favorite and one of my least favorite things about 4e.&nbsp; I hope that any new edition that comes out has the attitude that there is no reason for the NPC/monster system to match up with the PC one since they have entirely different purposes. I hope that the new edition is both easier to customize the classes in than 4e, and that the new edition doesn't have so many details that are tied directly to the one campaign setting (especially when those new details contradict the previous versions).As far as traditions -- if its called D&amp;D I would like to be able to run characters and adventures that feel like those I played in and ran from 1981 to&nbsp; 2008 in terms of the basic feel of the classes, races, monsters, and their interactions, without having to ignore huge chunks of the rule book (as opposed to say flavor-text side-bars).&nbsp; &nbsp; A post in another thread made me realize it would be just as nice if those who just started with 4e could say the same thing.&nbsp; I don't particularly attach any importance to the particular traditional mechanics, as long as they aren't changed just for the sake of being able to say something was changed (which is annoying).&nbsp; Improving them would be great.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Cadence, post: 6030913, member: 6701124"] My current extended group over the past 15 years has had a few dozen members and probably has at least one person who's tried most of the games out there, and has used at least five non-D&D systems over that time... D&D has been used for the majority of sessions though. Does that make us role-players or D&D players? Anyway, I think the problem 4e had for us is that it wasn't competing against 3.5, but against our house-ruled 3.5... and so, fallacy or not, I think 4e is the favorite D&D of only one or two of the group. As far as things 4e does worse, I think one of the bigger ones for me is how it presented the skill challenge resolution and the non-combat part of the game. Your posts (and those of several others) on the threads have encouraged me to take the time to revisit them. Similarly, I wish it made the rules for skills, professions, and crafts (in whatever form) sound more important. As noted by other posters, the 3.5 rules don't actually make some of those much more than money making tokens... but they strike me as having some symbolism beyond that. World building issuess tie into my favorite and one of my least favorite things about 4e. I hope that any new edition that comes out has the attitude that there is no reason for the NPC/monster system to match up with the PC one since they have entirely different purposes. I hope that the new edition is both easier to customize the classes in than 4e, and that the new edition doesn't have so many details that are tied directly to the one campaign setting (especially when those new details contradict the previous versions). As far as traditions -- if its called D&D I would like to be able to run characters and adventures that feel like those I played in and ran from 1981 to 2008 in terms of the basic feel of the classes, races, monsters, and their interactions, without having to ignore huge chunks of the rule book (as opposed to say flavor-text side-bars). A post in another thread made me realize it would be just as nice if those who just started with 4e could say the same thing. I don't particularly attach any importance to the particular traditional mechanics, as long as they aren't changed just for the sake of being able to say something was changed (which is annoying). Improving them would be great. [/QUOTE]

Verification