Let's talk about "plot", "story", and "play to find out."

[Micah Sweet]

Me too! AD&D 2.0 is my favourite, with the 1e DMG for inspiration

That is exactly how I feel!

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Why do people who want to stick with the old edition need to buy the new edition? What's the point of a new edition other than to do new things?

Yeah. And that is the same point I've made several times to people who endlessly moan in 5e threads, basically about 5e not being 4e.
Just play 4e if you like it more!

 

[Micah Sweet]

Wouldn't you have players expecting to use these things in play?

Not if there are many options that aren't designed to be used simultaneously, no. And if I did I would simply outline what I use and don't use in my campaign. Because that's where it matters.

 

[Maxperson]

What does this mean?

That's Annabelle on a bed.

 

[Lanefan]

It’s not a judgment. It’s an expression of bewilderment.

But sure… find offense in it and complain about that perceived offense when we’re talking about games you don’t even like.

Even in RPGs I do like, I still prefer it when the rules get out of the way whenever it's reasonably possible than they can.

 

[Lanefan]

Your read on that, the one about exclusion, is the issue here. That's a very personal and idiosycratic read, and one you'd need to support idntou wanted anyone to take it seriously.

WotC's 4e marketing strategy quite intentionally took the tack of actively punting all previous D&D editions to the curb, leading many fans of said earlier edition to feel that they too had been intentionally punted.

Hardly the most inclusive of approaches.

 

[Fenris-77]

WotC's 4e marketing strategy quite intentionally took the tack of actively punting all previous D&D editions to the curb, leading many fans of said earlier edition to feel that they too had been intentionally punted.

Hardly the most inclusive of approaches.

I'm not saying that's unfair, but I also don't think that was the marketing plan. It's not super important though. I didn't care for 4E either, so I do understand.

 

[darkbard]

Even in RPGs I do like, I still prefer it when the rules get out of the way whenever it's reasonably possible than they can.

It's good to know what you like! But what you're saying sure sounds like you enjoy role playing but not games.

I know, I know. Next you'll say you need the game component for combat because you can't just thespian combat. But if there were a way to "simulate" that without dice you would prefer that scenario. And so on.

All this while denying role playing and game can exist harmoniously in those other games with strong structures that support the fiction > mechanics > fiction back-and-forth. Because they're games you (think you) don't like.

 

[Fenris-77]

It's good to know what you like! But what you're saying sure sounds like you enjoy role playing but not games.

I don't think that's what he's saying at all. The whole point of light RPGs, or at least a part fo the point, is for the rules to fade into the background. That doesn't mean there are no rules, only that the extent to which the rules must be consulted is minimized during specific parts of the game. Some people, for example, don't like super crunchy combat and don't want to consult multiple tables or multiple modifiers every round. Other people love that stuff. They are both still playing games.