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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Desdichado" data-source="post: 5981405" data-attributes="member: 2205">That's my impression of 4e as well, which is why I remain disinterested, and haven't really spent much time looking at it, and absolutely none playing it.  However, it is patently untrue for 3e.  3e prominantly described "rule 0" at the beginning of the first book released, and then they even gave some samples for hapless would-be DMs who couldn't figure out how to modify the rules to taste, in the form of the witch sample character in the DMG.  And although there were a lot of rules, the prominent and oft-repeated motto of WotC in the 3e era was "tools, not rules" and like any toolkit, you used what you needed for your game and left the rest in your toolbox.  Vast swaths of rules never saw any use in any of my games.  Encumbrance was a notable example.  And heck, if I even actually ever read the entire section on dungeon door and wall materials and strength, then I don't really remember any of it.  More likely, I skimmed or skipped most of that entire chapter.Now, with 3.5, some of that language was toned down or removed.  But does it actually need to be explicitly stated to be true?  Especially to someone who's background is, as you claim, in earlier editions of D&D?  I certainly don't need a rulebook to explicitly grant me permission to come up with houserules--it's a given that of course I can do that as I please.  And I have.  My 3.5 houserule set is so dramatically different from "standard" that I've been validly described as no longer even playing D&D at all.  And heck, I embrace that paradigm.  And heck; frankly, I think my setting and preferred style is better suited to a d20 Modern, or Savage Worlds or houseruled Old School Hack or something anyway.Since the mid-80s or so, TSR and WotC have even been providing the books that inspired the game!  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Granted, there's some really valid criticism of D&D fiction vs. "regular" fantasy fiction.  But good D&D fiction is out there, and there sure is plenty of bad regular fiction.  Including much of the stuff on Appendix N.Again; I'm not familiar with 4e enough to comment, but with 3e and 3.5 that was true as well.  The official character sheet was front and back of one page.  But at least half--if not more--of that real estate was optional.  I rarely play spellcasters, and most of the back page was for listing spells (and equipment.  I do use those boxes!)  Much of the front half is for putting your attack bonuses for various weapons--and they give you many more than you're actually likely to use.  If I wanted to write a typical non-spellcasting character on an index card instead of use the sheet--I'm confident I could pull it off.  Although one sheet front and back, with plenty of room for stuff that I'm not actually using doesn't seem to be very burdensome to me.So you don't need them.  Shrug.  Don't buy them.  No big deal.  I think your implications and labels aren't really very fair, though.  It's dispicable to put popular older books back into print and donate a chunk of the profit margin (which is likely not very high anyway) to charity? And with that, you still can't find enough goodwill to do other than to question their motives and hint at them being somehow "ulterior?"  I think that says a great deal more about you than it does about WotC.  Y'know, if the direction of D&D is no longer to your taste, it's perfectly acceptable to just go do something else on your own without having to plant a big stinking turd of a ranting manifesto of all the things you think they did wrong to you personally.  If you like Pathfinder, just go play Pathfinder.  It's heavily supported, it seems to have a strong and enthusiastic player base, and its easily accessible.  The same is true for the OSR "family" of games.  You've got everything you want.  Let it go.  WotC didn't do anything to you personally you need to be bitter about.Slightly off topic, neither did George Lucas.  Just in case you lean that direction too.</blockquote>

Verification