Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
Ok to have an opinion about 4E?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="gizmo33" data-source="post: 3791993" data-attributes="member: 30001"><p>It seems like in a lot of the threads I read someone at sometime chimes in with a "we don't really know anything about 4E yet because they haven't published it so your point is invalid". I can see, in theory, that basing your opinion only on what's been released so far would be risky. But it seems like this "you don't know everything" objection is used for any opinion however loosely dependant on the reality of what 4E will be. </p><p></p><p>"If 4E has a picture of a ninja turtle on the front cover I will be unhappy" ought to speak for itself, and ought to be comprehensible regardless of what 4E artwork winds up looking like, but for some reason it's not to some people. And if a WotC designer writes a web article saying "I really like ninja turtles and it would be cool to use them for our cover art" then I would think the point would be even more pertinent.</p><p></p><p>Also, I have yet to see the "we don't have the published 4E rules" argument used to object to a statement <em>in support</em> of 4E, it seems to be exclusively used as a counter for someone complaining about a proposed new feature of 4E. And that one-sidedness doesn't make any logical sense to me.</p><p></p><p>First of all, the point of a message board is to discuss ideas. Most of these threads AFAICT are people expressing what they would like to see in an RPG. The "we haven't seen 4E yet" objection usually strikes me as being somewhat beside the point - which is mainly about what the person thinks of a particular feature of an RPG (like the "sweet spot" issue for levels or a dislike of ninja turtles).</p><p></p><p>Secondly, the point of the "behind the scenes" and preview type articles from WotC are to express a coherent idea. What is the point of publishing such an article if you can't make a coherent point in response to it? What are the designers really communicating to us if the "you haven't seen the final rules yet" argument trumps all debate? Again, this argument just seems like a tactic because you would think that it would logically apply to every thread and <em>any</em> opinion about 4E. (Except maybe "I trust the 4E designers to produce a great game" or variations of that.)</p><p></p><p>In closing, I would like to add that I've removed a sentence from this post that completely changes the meaning and adds a significance to what I've written that will blow your mind. Because of this, anyone who disagrees with me has no basis to do so because they haven't seen my full post. Trust me, if you saw the full version you would think it was great.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="gizmo33, post: 3791993, member: 30001"] It seems like in a lot of the threads I read someone at sometime chimes in with a "we don't really know anything about 4E yet because they haven't published it so your point is invalid". I can see, in theory, that basing your opinion only on what's been released so far would be risky. But it seems like this "you don't know everything" objection is used for any opinion however loosely dependant on the reality of what 4E will be. "If 4E has a picture of a ninja turtle on the front cover I will be unhappy" ought to speak for itself, and ought to be comprehensible regardless of what 4E artwork winds up looking like, but for some reason it's not to some people. And if a WotC designer writes a web article saying "I really like ninja turtles and it would be cool to use them for our cover art" then I would think the point would be even more pertinent. Also, I have yet to see the "we don't have the published 4E rules" argument used to object to a statement [i]in support[/i] of 4E, it seems to be exclusively used as a counter for someone complaining about a proposed new feature of 4E. And that one-sidedness doesn't make any logical sense to me. First of all, the point of a message board is to discuss ideas. Most of these threads AFAICT are people expressing what they would like to see in an RPG. The "we haven't seen 4E yet" objection usually strikes me as being somewhat beside the point - which is mainly about what the person thinks of a particular feature of an RPG (like the "sweet spot" issue for levels or a dislike of ninja turtles). Secondly, the point of the "behind the scenes" and preview type articles from WotC are to express a coherent idea. What is the point of publishing such an article if you can't make a coherent point in response to it? What are the designers really communicating to us if the "you haven't seen the final rules yet" argument trumps all debate? Again, this argument just seems like a tactic because you would think that it would logically apply to every thread and [i]any[/i] opinion about 4E. (Except maybe "I trust the 4E designers to produce a great game" or variations of that.) In closing, I would like to add that I've removed a sentence from this post that completely changes the meaning and adds a significance to what I've written that will blow your mind. Because of this, anyone who disagrees with me has no basis to do so because they haven't seen my full post. Trust me, if you saw the full version you would think it was great. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
Ok to have an opinion about 4E?
Top