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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Psion" data-source="post: 4118212" data-attributes="member: 172">You really are missing the point here.I've bolded the part that's not nothing. That is WORK.If I am going to have to stat up everything that they decided to change, that's work on my part. Why should I spend money on 4e if it doesn't support the game I want to play?I've already covered this one too. I'll be fighting upstream against player expectations, just like I did against "godless clerics and paladins" in 3.0.Repeating something false won't make it true. Saying I can do it myself, or work to extract a race from the book is not "supported". That's work I have to do myself. Those are distinct states of being; your suggestions to the contrary are meaningless spin.You keep obsessing on "the mechanics don't prevent me" whilst I've dismissed that as the source of my problem in my prior post. It's not the mechanics. Its the mechanical support, the incompatibility with other supplements for the game, and the player expectations. Those are real elements. Those are not "nothing" by any stretch of the imagination.Did I ever say that? No. Again, I'm talking about metasetting elements, not roleplaying. I'm sure I could have wonderful roleplaying sessions involving treants with wooden bewbs, lawful succubi, chaotic paladins, hawt tiefling warlocks, or archons that are jazzed up elementals if that's what I wanted. But I don't. The classic setting elements that have defined D&D from 1e-3e are my raison d'etre for buying any new edition of the D&D game; you don't support that, there is no reason that I should consider 4e over AE or Iron Heroes or Fantasy Hero or Aeternal Legends or Earthdawn or... whatever other fantasy game you care to name.So, my point has nothing to do with "4e ruins roleplaying." It's awfully convenient to stuff words in the mouth of someone who disagrees with you to set up a strawman, though, isn't it? Is it too inconvenient for you to believe that there's someone whose reasons for not buying into 4e is different that someone you argued with last Tuesday, so you have to rhetorically "squint your eyes" by redefining all objections into the same frothing argument so you can feel so superior in rejecting it?Or could you accept that I'm not that person damning 4e for roleplaying and admit that I have my own, distinct, entirely valid reasons that 4e is not for me?</blockquote>

Verification