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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ratskinner" data-source="post: 6081786" data-attributes="member: 6688937">I don't know what history you may have with Derren here, Hussar, but this doesn't seem particularly fair here. Derren made no claims about the rules content, only what he and "many others" thought of the rules. "Many others" is a very vague term which doesn't even imply a majority. Making no claims about the rules, he certainly cannot have been "cherry-picking" them. Given that "its a good skirmish game, but not D&D" is one of, if not the single most common dismissive comment I've witnessed about 4e both in-person and online, I think he's quite likely justified in using those words. While I thought initial 4e did a lot of things well...I'm pretty sure  those "other sections of the rules" you're talking about here were not  among them, especially if you are only considering the first 3 books. I  mean, wasn't the original skill challenge system one of the very first  things re-worked? Several recent conversations on this board have  featured 4e proponents (including [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION], IIRC) discussing the  weakness of the 4e books/system as it was originally presented especially  in all those OOC areas like skill challenges and scene-framing. To my eyes,  one of those conversations seemed to conclude that 4e initially  presented all that pretty badly, and it didn't even come close to fixing it  until DMG2 or later. I consider myself a pretty savvy gamer.  FWIW, FATE is actually my preferred system, and I've tried a lot of  other indie games. I totally did not see all the things you guys did in  4e. I was out of 4e about the time of PHB2. Now, maybe all the errata  and later books fixed or updated all those problems, and maybe all those  problems were only misperceptions due to 4e's horrible initial  presentation/editing/advertising/whatever. However, if you can only know  that by having stayed in the 4e in-group, you can't blame out-group  members for not knowing, or even for not caring anymore.  It may not be fair to the edition (whatever  that means), but that's the way it is.Now, that's not to say that we should quit talking about it.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> I've really enjoyed what folks like [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] and [MENTION=386]LostSoul[/MENTION] have had to say about 4e. It's gone a long way to "re-hab" the edition in my mind. If I had a group of willing players, I might buy the monster vault and give it another go.  (..might still pick MV and essentials, after they drop in price.) That's how I see it anyway. I hope that helps. Play what you like.</blockquote>

Verification