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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nemesis Destiny" data-source="post: 5703568" data-attributes="member: 98255">When I say, "wrong direction," it does not necessarily mean that I feel it is bad to go to previous editions for inspiration. I have very much liked some of the 4e "retro" stuff. I am a huge fan of Essentials, for example."Wrong direction" to me, means going back to some of the design tropes of previous editions that clearly were bad design. That can mean a lot of things to different people. I play 4e for a reason, and that reason is the same one that keeps a lot of other folks playing 3.x, PF, and earlier editions, i.e. they actually like the elements of design that I feel 4e fixed.That said, those people who liked that style of game already have everything they need, and are very unlikely to "buy back into" a new edition simply because it is new. I feel that the pursuit of their money will be a waste of time and will only cost WotC the business of the people who liked the 4e direction.In summary, taking inspiration and flavour from the past, acknowledging it, that's great. Don't alienate the current audience by making an about-face on 4e's strengths.Now I don't particularly care about offending your sensibilities ForeverSlayer, but I will qualify this by saying that I don't have any particular grudge against your hero Monte Cook. In fact I quite liked his post WotC work in the context of late 3.x design. But quite frankly, every time he publishes one of these columns, he erodes my confidence in his ability to design a new edition of D&D. I really hope these fears are unfounded, but while Mike Mearls I found pushed "all the right buttons" in his articles and with his designs, I can't say the same for Mr. Cook.Take from that what you will. I explained this to you as a courtesy; I don't owe you anything.</blockquote>

Verification