Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CM" data-source="post: 5803510" data-attributes="member: 18340">IBTL...Seriously, I am continually amazed at the vitriol spewed between factions of fans of the same game. Especially when it's all over some vague &quot;what we'd like to see&quot; ideas tossed around by WotC employees and playtests with characters built with barebones beta-test rules.I'm a big fan of 4e, just like I was a fan of every edition before that, in its time. The sky-is-falling cries I see from some other 4e fans are ridiculously premature. Let me tell you this: you're not helping &quot;the cause&quot; by drawing lines in the sand.You're complaining that the rules don't exactly model the 4e game when we've only seen the slightest glimpse of the core foundation of the game, much less any 4e-style tactical combat / action-hero themed add-ons which are likely months away from even a rough draft. 4e was an extreme evolution of 3e with some experimental ideas thrown in, just like 3e was with 2e. WotC has now come to the realization however that too many customers were being &quot;left behind&quot; with each new revision. A new base is needed upon which you can play your older-style narrative or simulationist games while at the same time allowing room for expansion options with the cinematic feel of more recent editions. It is easier to start with the simple base and add to it, rather than starting with the (to some) overwhelming options of 3e and 4e-style tactical play and adding options to remove them for old-school feel.So to any 4e fans complaining that WotC is catering to grognards, take a deep breath, step away from the computer, and realize that your options are coming. You can't start laying shingles before the building's foundation is even poured.Edit: TL;DR: Everything that Entilzha said.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CM, post: 5803510, member: 18340"] IBTL... Seriously, I am continually amazed at the vitriol spewed between factions of fans of the same game. Especially when it's all over some vague "what we'd like to see" ideas tossed around by WotC employees and playtests with characters built with barebones beta-test rules. I'm a big fan of 4e, just like I was a fan of every edition before that, in its time. The sky-is-falling cries I see from some other 4e fans are ridiculously premature. Let me tell you this: you're not helping "the cause" by drawing lines in the sand. You're complaining that the rules don't exactly model the 4e game when we've only seen the slightest glimpse of the core foundation of the game, much less any 4e-style tactical combat / action-hero themed add-ons which are likely months away from even a rough draft. 4e was an extreme evolution of 3e with some experimental ideas thrown in, just like 3e was with 2e. WotC has now come to the realization however that too many customers were being "left behind" with each new revision. A new base is needed upon which you can play your older-style narrative or simulationist games while at the same time allowing room for expansion options with the cinematic feel of more recent editions. It is easier to start with the simple base and add to it, rather than starting with the (to some) overwhelming options of 3e and 4e-style tactical play and adding options to remove them for old-school feel. So to any 4e fans complaining that WotC is catering to grognards, take a deep breath, step away from the computer, and realize that your options are coming. You can't start laying shingles before the building's foundation is even poured. Edit: TL;DR: Everything that Entilzha said. [/QUOTE]

Verification