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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 4933275" data-attributes="member: 19675">I disagree.From my own personal experience as a musician, artist and jewelry designer, along with the experiences noted in Piers Anthony's annotated But What of Earth and many of the inexplicable changes in things like the movie/TV adaptations of The Scarlet Letter, Silence of the Lambs or Earthsea, I'd have to say that change for the sake of change, while sometimes thinly rationalized ("This sounds cooler!"), does exist.I suppose, though, it depends upon how one defines "change for the sake of change"- a phrase that IMO is used more in an idiomatic than literal sense.One literal example, though, may be the casting/recasting of the role of Harvey Dent in the original Batman movie and subsequent ones.  Originally, Billy Dee Williams was cast- giving the role of a Caucasian comic book character to a black actor may have been such a change- but when Two-Face (the villain whom Dent would become) showed up in a subsequent role, Tommy Lee Jones- a white actor- was cast.Acting abilities and scheduling conflicts aside, why the 2 race changes?All that said, though, I'm with KM on this in regards to 4Ed.  Many of the changes seemed arbitrary to me, and offered no obvious improvement to the original rules.I love the old, 9 alignment system, and feel its one of the things that made D&D D&D.  That said, I know its not for everyone.However, the 4Ed 5 position system is...flawed.  Despite my preference for the 9 point system, I feel that a 3 point system (G-U-E) or ditching alignment entirely would have been superior to what 4Ed gave us.</blockquote>

Verification