Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 4119823" data-attributes="member: 22779">Are you kidding?Fiery Dragon's Battlebox.&nbsp; Spell cards.&nbsp; TOGC's got a ton of cards.&nbsp; Cards for conditions.&nbsp; Good grief, 3e had bazillions of cards.What you are claiming as &quot;building a deck&quot; is EXACTLY what every spell caster has done for 30 years.&nbsp; But, suddenly now it's card gaming?&nbsp; That's what I'm getting at.&nbsp; The criticisms are not any more valid now.&nbsp; If the criticism can be applied to every other edition, then how is it a criticism of 4e?Video gamey is such an incredibly vague, obscure term that it can be applied to just about any edition or any concept.&nbsp; It makes no more sense now than it did before.&nbsp; Or, can you explain how 4e is somehow closer to Mario Kart?How is that not saying that 4e is an objectively bad edition?&nbsp; You are flat out stating that this is the WRONG SOLUTION.&nbsp; Game theory and gaming philosophy is not created in a vacuum.&nbsp; They continuously feed back and forth.&nbsp; This is precisely what we saw in the Anime thread in my sig.&nbsp; People would point to something and say, &quot;THAT'S ANIME&quot; and then, when you scratch the surface a bit, suddenly the grandfathering is nowhere near that clear.&nbsp; The art is influenced by anime, of course - anime is popular and people are doing popular art.&nbsp; But, since there is a back and forth, constantly, you cannot really state empirically which informs the other.The same works for game theory.&nbsp; Concepts that are developed for board games get ported into video games, then back to tabletop RPG's all the while being seasoned by something else.&nbsp; It's not that 4e is somehow more video gamey or card gamey or anything else.&nbsp; Not unless you reverse the statement as well.&nbsp; Video games are becoming more D&amp;D'y.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 4119823, member: 22779"] Are you kidding? Fiery Dragon's Battlebox. Spell cards. TOGC's got a ton of cards. Cards for conditions. Good grief, 3e had bazillions of cards. What you are claiming as "building a deck" is EXACTLY what every spell caster has done for 30 years. But, suddenly now it's card gaming? That's what I'm getting at. The criticisms are not any more valid now. If the criticism can be applied to every other edition, then how is it a criticism of 4e? Video gamey is such an incredibly vague, obscure term that it can be applied to just about any edition or any concept. It makes no more sense now than it did before. Or, can you explain how 4e is somehow closer to Mario Kart? How is that not saying that 4e is an objectively bad edition? You are flat out stating that this is the WRONG SOLUTION. Game theory and gaming philosophy is not created in a vacuum. They continuously feed back and forth. This is precisely what we saw in the Anime thread in my sig. People would point to something and say, "THAT'S ANIME" and then, when you scratch the surface a bit, suddenly the grandfathering is nowhere near that clear. The art is influenced by anime, of course - anime is popular and people are doing popular art. But, since there is a back and forth, constantly, you cannot really state empirically which informs the other. The same works for game theory. Concepts that are developed for board games get ported into video games, then back to tabletop RPG's all the while being seasoned by something else. It's not that 4e is somehow more video gamey or card gamey or anything else. Not unless you reverse the statement as well. Video games are becoming more D&D'y. [/QUOTE]

Verification