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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="the Jester" data-source="post: 5597390" data-attributes="member: 1210">Fair enough, but I think they have explained a good dozen times the issue that really provoked this: retailers who didn't know what to stock. Then again, there is a long tradition of ignoring what WotC says in favor of doomsday prophecies, so I shouldn't be surprised.I don't see this. I see the standard tactic of pushing support for new products, that's all. An Essentials article in Dragon no more means that pre-Essentials builds are marginalized than a beastmaster article meant that the pre-MP ranger builds were- it's just an article to push support for the new release. We have ALWAYS seen this in Dragon magazine, going back to the days of 1e.And I don't think any of those things have happened, with the possible exception of the seeker and runepriest shuffling off.Just because you can filter Essentials and Classic options doesn't shuffle anything off to anywhere.But that's just more of the whole thing that all the complaints are: "I haven't tried it, but I'm sure I know what will happen!" There are doom and gloom predictions, and in all fairness the difficulties in multiclassing aren't a big deal- they're being dealt with already via free DDI articles. I think a good tactic to address those concerns is for thousands of people to try mixing and matching 4e and 4E and seeing if there are any issues. Guess what! It has already happened!The reason I've bolded, upsized and colored my challenge is because I haven't seen any sign that anyone with concerns about mixing Essentials with Classic has done a thing to actually try it; or else if they have it assuaged their concerns. If anyone has had issues mixing, I'd love to know what they were so that I could watch out for them. If someone points out anything that I think is a reasonable concern, I'll totally acknowledge it (you're a good case in point, actually- I've acknowledged several points that you've made vis a vis defining compatibility, etc). But most of the naysayers seem to be saying, "Haven't tried it, but I'm sure it won't work" while many of us on the other side of the argument are saying, "But we've been doing it for almost a year!" It's fine to criticize game elements based on how they look or read or how you think they work, but that rarely tells the whole story. Actually using them does a much better job of testing them out. I assure you that the critical mass existed during the 3e era. There was whinging and gnashing then, but somehow it missed this concern.In the 2e and 1e days, there were the Dragon Magazine forum and letters pages, there were conventions, there were meetups... I don't buy the "critical mass" argument.</blockquote>

Verification