Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="rounser" data-source="post: 228673" data-attributes="member: 1106">While I think you have a point, I also think that to a lot of people, D&D is viewed in a similar way to democracy, or a much-loved partner or family member: there are clearly flaws and things you'd like to change about it, but you guess that the alternatives are probably worse (or you're comfortable and secure with what you know), and you know that the changes would probably ruin it's strong points.  Even then, I think that sometimes this doesn't stop the bitching about perceived weaknesses, even if they're minor. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />The rules for 3E are printed, and therefore not negotiable beyond houseruling or errata.  However, this is a discussion board, where people can air frustrations with the game, and perhaps even resolve them, somehow.  Wizards have also implied that they're keeping a lookout for people's concerns regarding D&D, and so who knows, if enough people agree, a concern may even be addressed in 4E.Thirdly, I think that people (including myself) can take for granted what they've got.  Familiarity breeds contempt, and there's an innate urge to shake up the status quo once it gets old or loses novelty.  An example of the result of which was pointed out in another thread - the class archetypes seeming restrictive, and that being explained as probably  because we're used to them.  Perhaps to balance this, maybe it is worth asking questions like, "If I got rid of this emphasis on items for these reasons, would I miss it after it's gone?  What does it add to the game which I'm ignoring whilst I pan what I think it takes away from the game?"  When trying to justify the quashing of an annoying part of the game, I suppose that it's easy to ignore what that part actually adds to the game (but you've taken for granted) when engaged in the crusade to unjustify it's existence.Having said that, I should probably take my own advice on that point.  I'm sometimes sensitive to what I perceive as the losses involved in stylistic changes in the game since prior editions, and am perhaps somewhat blind to the good things that have been added in their place.  It is human nature to notice and point out the negative more than the positive, methinks.(I still don't like the choices involved in the contents of the 3E Monster Manual very much, though - even if they are selected to fit gameplay niches...thanks for the CC and upcoming ToH, Grazzt!) <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" />But I see your point, Ashtal - complaints about the game can reach a critical mass whereby you have to ask, "Why are you playing it then?"</blockquote>

Verification