Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Vyvyan Basterd" data-source="post: 5746274" data-attributes="member: 4892">First, if you're mistaking my posts as recruitment to 4E, please stop. I don't really have an invested interest in what you decide to play.Second, if you don't like the reskinning approach then don't attribute the abstract rule to reskinning if that's what bothers you. A much simpler explanantion is that the entire party has had one profession in common for the past 30 levels: adventuring. So they've gotten better at things adventurers commonly do along the way.Third, I can just as easily say there is a &quot;significant percentage&quot; of RPGers who don't like the arbitrary rules created for the sake of simulationism any more than we liked arbitrary level limits and blunt weapons for clerics in AD&amp;D. And if WotC keeps catering to the group that wants everything to be &quot;real&quot; they will never satisfy everyone, because each person has a different opinion on how to simulate &quot;reality.&quot; I've personally been through the table arguments in AD&amp;D when the rules didn't cover something and the DM tried to dictate what he thought should happen &quot;realistically.&quot; And I've been through the table arguments where the SCSA guy at the table thought the armor penalties in 3E were &quot;ridiculously unrealistic&quot; even though D&amp;D includes those in a shot at simulation.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Vyvyan Basterd, post: 5746274, member: 4892"] First, if you're mistaking my posts as recruitment to 4E, please stop. I don't really have an invested interest in what you decide to play. Second, if you don't like the reskinning approach then don't attribute the abstract rule to reskinning if that's what bothers you. A much simpler explanantion is that the entire party has had one profession in common for the past 30 levels: adventuring. So they've gotten better at things adventurers commonly do along the way. Third, I can just as easily say there is a "significant percentage" of RPGers who don't like the arbitrary rules created for the sake of simulationism any more than we liked arbitrary level limits and blunt weapons for clerics in AD&D. And if WotC keeps catering to the group that wants everything to be "real" they will never satisfy everyone, because each person has a different opinion on how to simulate "reality." I've personally been through the table arguments in AD&D when the rules didn't cover something and the DM tried to dictate what he thought should happen "realistically." And I've been through the table arguments where the SCSA guy at the table thought the armor penalties in 3E were "ridiculously unrealistic" even though D&D includes those in a shot at simulation. [/QUOTE]

Verification