to the moderators--don't worry, no topical political discussion here. regardless of how i start the thread off, this is a dnd related post
as a political junky, i think i educate myself well on the issues, and how the issues effect me. i give each side a listen and a read, then read outside independent sources, then decide what my opinion is. i dont follow any party's beliefs "just because." i dont decide something relate to political issues unless i am very well informed.
i find myself really really irritated at stupid people who vote due to single issue reasons. "so and so is not for X issue, therefore i cant vote for him." Even though X issue is a wedge issue, or an issue which will never affect them. that one single issue decided everything for them.
and yet, i admit that as to 4e i did exactly what those stupid people do. i decided against 4e but never even played it. i skimmed the books but mostly read the discussion here, and based my opinion on others opinions rather than seek out the whole truth for myself.
what did it for me, what made me against 4e, were a few simple things that i had read about.
1. as a fan of the wizard class, i dont like how 4e made spells into rituals and gave other classes the ability to perform them. i liked the vancian system. i also like classes which are very different from each other in ability.
(note: we never had a problem with running out of spells and making a wizard feel useless if he wasn't blasting somehing every round. every class has a role in the game. that doesnt mean every class needs to always be doing damage every combat round to feel useful. we even houseruled away rogues ability to backstab when flanking. so for the most part rogues are not a big part of combat either. our games are not combat-centered.)
2. how can you possibly make magic missiles not automatically hit?
3. fighters shouldn't be able to heal themselves unless they have a potion or other magic item. healing surges are stupid.
4. it seems too combat oriented.
that's it. thats the sum total of the reasons i didn't consider 4e.
am i saying that i've had an epiphany and will buy the books and try it for 6 sessions?
no.
truth be told, our heavily houseruled 3.0 game works fine for us. no one really has the time or interest to learn and play the new version. anything we feel we are lacking, we add in. if something is broken, we fix it. a friend of a friend has access to a billion 3.x pdf files, so we have access to like every wotc and third party resource ever published.
if wotc and every other gaming company goes out of business today and nothing is ever again published for dnd, i doubt it will change our weekly sessions for the next 40 yrs. we have everything we need to continue to have fun until the day we die. i also doubt that whatever is put out by wotc or any third party publisher will be purchased or otherwise change the way we play our game. we have everything we need.
we don't have any desire to change. we are not sold on the need for the new shiny. and we have no fears that we will be left behind if we dont change, because with the resources we have at our disposal, we have enough to play for 6 more lifetimes.
we don't consider ourselves part of any "cool crowd", so that we need to keep up with them in terms of the latest and greatest. we are just 4 guys, all approaching 40 yrs old, who like to get together and play our game and have a guy's night out. we don't associate with other gamers, basically because we know no one else who plays. our only connection with the outside world of others gaming experiences is me, here on enworld, because i am the single guy with no kids and have the time. they don't.
if i hear about something in 4e or something is put out by a third party publisher that i think we might want to adapt to our group, i will check it out and bring it to the group's attention. pretty much anything new that we add or tweak comes from my experiences and what i hear about on these boards anyhow. none of the rest of my group really have any desire to look into new stuff.
i guess our group's 3.0 game is sorta like the guy with the 15 yr old honda accord. he drives it from place to place, because it gets him where he needs to go. even though he can afford a new car, or can add more bling to the honda, he doesn't do it. the car works just fine for him. coffee stains and all.
as a political junky, i think i educate myself well on the issues, and how the issues effect me. i give each side a listen and a read, then read outside independent sources, then decide what my opinion is. i dont follow any party's beliefs "just because." i dont decide something relate to political issues unless i am very well informed.
i find myself really really irritated at stupid people who vote due to single issue reasons. "so and so is not for X issue, therefore i cant vote for him." Even though X issue is a wedge issue, or an issue which will never affect them. that one single issue decided everything for them.
and yet, i admit that as to 4e i did exactly what those stupid people do. i decided against 4e but never even played it. i skimmed the books but mostly read the discussion here, and based my opinion on others opinions rather than seek out the whole truth for myself.
what did it for me, what made me against 4e, were a few simple things that i had read about.
1. as a fan of the wizard class, i dont like how 4e made spells into rituals and gave other classes the ability to perform them. i liked the vancian system. i also like classes which are very different from each other in ability.
(note: we never had a problem with running out of spells and making a wizard feel useless if he wasn't blasting somehing every round. every class has a role in the game. that doesnt mean every class needs to always be doing damage every combat round to feel useful. we even houseruled away rogues ability to backstab when flanking. so for the most part rogues are not a big part of combat either. our games are not combat-centered.)
2. how can you possibly make magic missiles not automatically hit?
3. fighters shouldn't be able to heal themselves unless they have a potion or other magic item. healing surges are stupid.
4. it seems too combat oriented.
that's it. thats the sum total of the reasons i didn't consider 4e.
am i saying that i've had an epiphany and will buy the books and try it for 6 sessions?
no.
truth be told, our heavily houseruled 3.0 game works fine for us. no one really has the time or interest to learn and play the new version. anything we feel we are lacking, we add in. if something is broken, we fix it. a friend of a friend has access to a billion 3.x pdf files, so we have access to like every wotc and third party resource ever published.
if wotc and every other gaming company goes out of business today and nothing is ever again published for dnd, i doubt it will change our weekly sessions for the next 40 yrs. we have everything we need to continue to have fun until the day we die. i also doubt that whatever is put out by wotc or any third party publisher will be purchased or otherwise change the way we play our game. we have everything we need.
we don't have any desire to change. we are not sold on the need for the new shiny. and we have no fears that we will be left behind if we dont change, because with the resources we have at our disposal, we have enough to play for 6 more lifetimes.
we don't consider ourselves part of any "cool crowd", so that we need to keep up with them in terms of the latest and greatest. we are just 4 guys, all approaching 40 yrs old, who like to get together and play our game and have a guy's night out. we don't associate with other gamers, basically because we know no one else who plays. our only connection with the outside world of others gaming experiences is me, here on enworld, because i am the single guy with no kids and have the time. they don't.
if i hear about something in 4e or something is put out by a third party publisher that i think we might want to adapt to our group, i will check it out and bring it to the group's attention. pretty much anything new that we add or tweak comes from my experiences and what i hear about on these boards anyhow. none of the rest of my group really have any desire to look into new stuff.
i guess our group's 3.0 game is sorta like the guy with the 15 yr old honda accord. he drives it from place to place, because it gets him where he needs to go. even though he can afford a new car, or can add more bling to the honda, he doesn't do it. the car works just fine for him. coffee stains and all.
Last edited:
away from PCs of other classes. Vancian, that's fair enough. Classes being different, yeah, I'll kinda agree there too. But not entirely, wichever edition I'm looking at. . .
Meh, it's a matter of taste, or tradition, or whatever. A pretty minor one, too. IMO, and all that.
Just so ya know. Devil's advocate? Maybe. Just curious and feel like talkin', for the most part.
)
