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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="aboyd" data-source="post: 4914102" data-attributes="member: 44797">I said something similar on rpg.net a month ago, and I was tarred & feathered for it.  I'm glad you can say it here.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />It's a bad rationale for not playing 4th, but that's not entirely what this poll is about.  I believe that the author of the poll clarified on page three that he was simply asking what it would take to bring people back to WotC as customers, not necessarily 4th edition gamers.  Even without his clarification, that's how I interpreted it anyway.Therefore, you have a bunch of people like me, who checked off the PDF option not because if WotC sold PDFs I would play 4th, but because if WotC sold PDFs I would buy them.  It's likely I would buy PDFs of all the Basic & 1st edition modules.  I'm suddenly a customer, but not playing 4th.This.  For me, what I need is that any D&D game follow the tagline on the Basic rulebook: "This game requires no gameboard because the action takes place in the player's imagination."I'm not opposed to battlemats, nor am I opposed to minis.  However, the game I just hosted last Saturday was completely off-the-cuff with no maps at all.  If I do this in Basic, it's works as intended.  Heck, I can even do it in 3.5 edition, and really all that falls by the wayside are attacks of opportunity.  But if I try to do this with 4th... blah.  I lose tons of elements.I need a game where the battlemat enhances things and might be fun to use, but is not required.  For now, I do 3.5 edition, and usually but not always have a battlemat.  It's OK.</blockquote>

Verification