Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="gizmo33" data-source="post: 4804323" data-attributes="member: 30001">Foolish about what?  I would think that statments like that would be plainly against the board rules. I told you what it was I didn't know.  You still haven't identified where this came from, or anything that lets someone who doesn't know the context make any sense of it in terms of game design.   The thing that's setting off my bs detector is that "sacred cow" is a perjorative term.  It suggests to me that the designers included something that they knew wouldn't make for a good game.  For what reason?  Since when did the 4E people give two hoots about anything in prior editions?  Why would they admit to comprimising on their principles without an explanation?   I'm being skeptical, not snarky.  There are lots of people on this board making unsubstantiated pronouncements about what 4E should and shouldn't be.  And like you, they may or may not be right but I think it's sensible to expect a little substance (I don't mean restating what you said and adding the word "indeed" to the end).  I often suspect that these rememberances that people have are filtered through a layer of interpretation.  Saying "I remember seeing it somewhere" is fine for your purposes I suppose, but I see no harm in asking for sources on things that you're claiming were said by someone else.  The other thing about context:  I remember one instance of the devs not agreeing on an issue.  The case I remember was character death and dying rules.  So the opinion of a single dev about a certain rule that was kept in the game may not be the final word on what the other devs thought or what it all really means.</blockquote>

Verification