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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5555860" data-attributes="member: 42582">This may well be so. The suggestion goes back at least to Ron Edwards "nuking the applecart" essay.But this is pretty orthogonal to magic item wishlists, "say yes", etc. There is no evidence that I'm aware of that links those aspects of a game to unplayability, or to the prioritisation of commerce over play (for example, they are techniques invented by, or derived from, the small press games that you laud).As it happens, I don't find WotC's publication of long lists of PC build elements particularly problematic. The cluttering of the game with cruft is offset to a significant extent (at least in my view) by the increase in options for players to build the PCs that they want to play. 4e doesn't suffer from a proliferation of mechanical subsystems or "optional expansions" of the Frostburn/Stormwrack/Wilderness Survival Guide etc variety.The other sort of supplemental material that I find tends to impede playability is setting/story material that dictates how the fiction is to unfold and (in part by creating default expectations) interferes in the free development of the story by the players and GM. Up until recently, 4e has also been relatively free of this sort of material (there is some of it in Manual of the Planes, Underdark, Plane Above and Plane Below but in all but the first of those books its in the minority). Gloomwrought looks like it's going to provide more of it.EDIT: We cross-posted. I agree with what you say about "say yes or roll the dice" - although I think 4e's "say yes" is also about creative control/collaboration, as Mallus said upthread.</blockquote>

Verification