Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DMKastmaria" data-source="post: 5915158" data-attributes="member: 6678082">We're talking about the Quality of Ideas, here, not Cars or other manufactured items (see below for more on that.) RPG ideas bear their main fruit in the psychic imagination, though this will spill-over into objective reality. Their result, their worthiness can only be measured by the individual. No physical instruments exists, which can measure those ideas, though you can measure some of the effects upon those individual subjects. It's not about "because I like it." It's about the reasons why I like it. And you can argue that the ideas of later designers are of higher quality, until doomsday, but you'll never prove it objectively true. If you were to do so, you would perforce have also solved so many problems in philosophy, religion, psychology, and numerous other fields, that it would qualify you for the Nobel Prize. A lot of people claim the unified mechanic of d20 games, is better than the sub-systems of older versions. I disagree. Makes it a pain to kitbash and tweak the system. It may be prettier, but it makes the game almost useless, for my purposes.Ditto, for d20's three save system. People say it's "elegent." For myself, it just hamstrings my imagination. I don't want, nor do I need all saves, tied to those three ability scores. Feats. Most of the worthwhile ones, I'd let a player attempt, anyway. Once you 86 those that only make sense within the context of the d20 rules.Cleave is great, though! Best idea that the 3e designers swiped from Dave Arneson's old campaign. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Balance. A lot of people like 4e's balance. For others, it sucks the life out of the game. We can discuss, examine, pick apart and argue the quality of the ideas that create 4e's Balance. We'll go <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> for tat. Point for counterpoint. And the best we'll do, is discover some part of the Intent, plans and purposes, which makes 4e useful for you and 1e useful for me. For my intent, 4e's ideas just aren't suitable. 1e's ideas are, though  adjustments are necessary. 4 more things. 1. The quality of the idea of "seizing narrative control" in RPG's is most definitely, debatable. For many, it moves the game into not-rpg territory. It doesn't serve the intent of what they're trying to create. 2. For an example of a manufacturing process going provably, objectively backwards, quality-wise, see Book Making/Binding.3. In order to prove that the ideas of 4e are qualitatively better than any other edition, the best you could possibly do is to prove those ideas to be more suitable to the intent of just over half of all gamers. This would necessitate complete knowledge of the nervous system of every rpg gamer who has ever lived and ever will live. And would only prove those ideas to be superior, in that one aspect alone. 4. Technology. The technology behind automobile manufacturing has increased, considerably. For RPG's? It's still Pencil, Paper, Dice, Your Imagination. Mini's optional, dependent upon edition. That last sentence, is the only change at all!</blockquote>

Verification