Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="bouncyhead" data-source="post: 4927058" data-attributes="member: 19115">4E marketing certainly worked for me. The chaps in my group pretty much raced each other to get the core books first and we were playing KotS with the preview rules (and a bit of the Red Hand of Doom fan conversion) before release.It turned out that 4E wasn't for us in the end but I don't recall feeling that WotC had misrepresented the system.I do however remember reading the core books and thinking 'this doesn't look like my cup of tea' but remembering the non-WotC generated buzz (on AICN and elsewhere) of 'it reads bad but plays great' that had been pushing me through moments of doubt when playing the preview rules. This kept me (and our group) persisting with the system (despite not 'feeling' it) for a lot longer than we otherwise would have.As for 'insulting' designer talk. I didn't pick up on this myself. I think there's a big difference between highlighting shortcomings in rule mechanics as opposed to rule intent. I'm not bothered when someone tells me that they have put together a slicker way of doing X. It might bother me (I think 'insulted' would be putting it way too strongly for me!) if was told that the old rule didn't support playstyle Y, playstyle Y is better, the new rule supports playstyle Y, the new rule is better.</blockquote>