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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ty" data-source="post: 3869004" data-attributes="member: 16824">Clearly you failed to actually read the quote or the context of my response.  To put it bluntly, one of the lead designers of 4th Edition wrote off AD&D and 2nd Edition as inferior to Runequest or Talisman.  It's a level of arrogance that doesn't inspire confidence in me that the designers will at least respect the history of the game.  Personally, my concerns regarding this type of statement by a lead designer are as valid as your opinion that the game needs a serious revision.  If Mr. Heinsoo intends on making D&D more similar to a system he preferred such as Talisman or Runequest, that is fine.  He's getting paid to do this.  I find it rather funny that anyone who raises a concern regarding the direction that D&D is headed is dismissed reflexively as a "grognard" or some anachronism.  Further, I find it quite entertaining that there are a number of posters throughout Enworld who deem D&D as needing to change to be similar to other games because those posters played those other game systems and found them superior in one way or another.It's also rather funny that what you view as an "improvement of the game" is somehow superior to past editions.  3.5 certainly was a failure in terms of the balancing of the game across 30 or so levels.  This failure wasn't quite as present in past editions in my personal experience.  Yet somehow, AD&D and 2nd Edition are dismissed by the lead designer I quoted.The real irony here is that D&D does appear to be leaning more and more towards the "gamer" out there and less and less towards the traditional D&D player.  If that is the market that Hasbro wishes to tap, good luck to them.  I however, find the "gamer" crowd much more flitting in their loyalties to a particular system.As for improvements, let me ask this final question:What is a solid, fact-based improvement that you can definitively point to at this time?  As far as I'm aware, they have not solidified any specific rules as of yet.  In fact, we are seeing nothing more than their own internal playtests without the firm mechanical rules explanations.  The boards are filled with suppositions as to how the game will change, etc., yet there is no proverbial "proof" in the pudding we're being provided.I appreciate your candor in completely dismissing my thoughts though.  It's certainly refreshing to see such a well reasoned response.</blockquote>

Verification