D&D 4E I'm really concerned about 4E

[Imaro]

Well, no, because Canadian football is defined by its rules. However, as has been demonstrated umpteen times on these boards, D&D isn't.

Okay let me get this straight...D&D isn't defined by it's rules? Huh, I'm confused. So if I pick up the Exalted corebook and say I'm playing D&D...you guys will know exactly what I'm talking about when I ask if my Essence 3 Solar Twilight caste can use a perfect defense charm?

This makes no sense. D&D is defined by it's rules...the only uncertainty is what rules and how much they define it.

 

[Simia Saturnalia]

This is contradicted by a recent blog entry (Gleemax is down or I'd find it) to the effect that all planar monsters are now high-level, and that a planar gate opening is really scary because it means epic-level monsters will pour out. It seems pretty clear the planes are reserved for level 20+ adventures; they're just trying to make them more interesting places for those adventures.

While I got a similar impression from the thing you're talking about - I thought it was the last podcast though - though I gleaned level 10+ from it.

 

[Shortman McLeod]

Okay let me get this straight...D&D isn't defined by it's rules? Huh, I'm confused. So if I pick up the Exalted corebook and say I'm playing D&D...you guys will know exactly what I'm talking about when I ask if my Essence 3 Solar Twilight caste can use a perfect defense charm?

This makes no sense. D&D is defined by it's rules...the only uncertainty is what rules and how much they define it.

You are absolutely right. I think Dr. Awkward meant something different when he said that "D&D isn't defined by its rules" . . . because otherwise, you may as well play backgammon and call it D&D.

Dr. Awkward, what were you trying to say?

 

[Raven Crowking]

Odhanan, I feel for you. I understand perfectly what you were saying in your OP (or, at least, I think I do).

The problem is that when your complaints boil down to an amorphous feeling that something intrinsic to what makes the game D&D has been lost, your opinions are not only difficult to communicate to others, but in fact are completely untranslatable into a language comprehensible to people who lack the same gaming background you have.

It is a logical fallacy to believe that, because a point cannot be clearly articulated by a speaker, that the point is invalid.

It does, however, make it harder to discuss.

 

[Xyl]

If basketball had dribbling, would it still be basketball?

 

[Cadfan]

It is a logical fallacy to believe that, because a point cannot be clearly articulated by a speaker, that the point is invalid.

It does, however, make it harder to discuss.

Its not a question of clear articulation. Its like some hippie telling you that she can tell you've changed because your aura isn't blue anymore. If you don't believe in auras, can't see auras, and she can't point to anything else about you that's changed other than your aura, what are you supposed to do with that? Give her opinion a serious and sober consideration?

 

[Shortman McLeod]

Its not a question of clear articulation. Its like some hippie telling you that she can tell you've changed because your aura isn't blue anymore. If you don't believe in auras, can't see auras, and she can't point to anything else about you that's changed other than your aura, what are you supposed to do with that? Give her opinion a serious and sober consideration?

It depends on how hot she is.

 

[Raven Crowking]

It depends on how hot she is.

You win the Interweb.

Seriously, though, the answer is that the statement is non-evidenciary. You cannot say that it proves anything, or disproves anything.

RC

 

[Azgulor]

Oh, and how is going with the "1st Core Three of 4E" any different than saying "Core Rulebooks only in 3E?" Buy what you want, deny what you don't. If players complain, kick 'em out, here them out, or whatever you do in your current game.

The difference here, though, is that a lot of what people consider core (i.e. specific classes, races, monsters) are being intentionally diverted to books beyond the "1st Core Three". It's potentially a shrewd marketing move, but it's also fueling the concern.

 

[Jhaelen]

The difference here, though, is that a lot of what people consider core (i.e. specific classes, races, monsters) are being intentionally diverted to books beyond the "1st Core Three". It's potentially a shrewd marketing move, but it's also fueling the concern.

Am I the only one who still believes that when a WotC employee talks about something being 'Core' simply means 'not setting-specific'?
It's the term they've always used in their future product listings to express exactly that.

IIRC, they never used the term 'Core' to describe 'everything that is in the SRD' or 'the bare minimum required to play the game', which are the two meanings most often associated with 'Core' on these boards.