Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
Rant on the 4E "Presentation"
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 3852225" data-attributes="member: 54877"><p>G. K. Chesterton answered you almost 100 years ago. The "idea of progress" has never been that "change can be for the better"--at least not in people espousing "progress" for its own sake. Rather, it is that there is some direction that we are "progressing" towards, with the very carefully unstated implication that the direction is a good one. It also usually comes with the assumption that there is nothing fundamental about the human condition (that is, all parts of the human condition are subject to improvement via "progress"). The problem arises when you delve into the details, because then agreement about direction goes poof. <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" /></p><p></p><p>As GKC also said, given clear goals, you can progress towards a bad goal, a good goal, or even an indifferent goal--as long as you have a clear goal. Only problem is that the more clear the goal, the more people jump off the bandwagon. And if you get fuzzy on the goal to avoid that, then you are sacrificing the goal for the concept of "progress". You can't "progress" anywhere going seven different directions at once. <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" /> </p><p></p><p>I think we see the truth of GKC's points already, in the nature of the discussion since the 4E was announced. I'm fairly certain that the 4E designers have a goal in mind, and have a pretty decent shot of attaining it. If they set out to fix X, Y, and Z, they will probably nail X to the wall, send Y scurrying for the shadows, and at least make Z hunker down in the corner most of the time. What the side effects will be, and how this will interact with the (human) legions of fans, and their goals and perceptions, remains to be seen. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 3852225, member: 54877"] G. K. Chesterton answered you almost 100 years ago. The "idea of progress" has never been that "change can be for the better"--at least not in people espousing "progress" for its own sake. Rather, it is that there is some direction that we are "progressing" towards, with the very carefully unstated implication that the direction is a good one. It also usually comes with the assumption that there is nothing fundamental about the human condition (that is, all parts of the human condition are subject to improvement via "progress"). The problem arises when you delve into the details, because then agreement about direction goes poof. :D As GKC also said, given clear goals, you can progress towards a bad goal, a good goal, or even an indifferent goal--as long as you have a clear goal. Only problem is that the more clear the goal, the more people jump off the bandwagon. And if you get fuzzy on the goal to avoid that, then you are sacrificing the goal for the concept of "progress". You can't "progress" anywhere going seven different directions at once. :D I think we see the truth of GKC's points already, in the nature of the discussion since the 4E was announced. I'm fairly certain that the 4E designers have a goal in mind, and have a pretty decent shot of attaining it. If they set out to fix X, Y, and Z, they will probably nail X to the wall, send Y scurrying for the shadows, and at least make Z hunker down in the corner most of the time. What the side effects will be, and how this will interact with the (human) legions of fans, and their goals and perceptions, remains to be seen. :lol: [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
Rant on the 4E "Presentation"
Top