Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 4933759" data-attributes="member: 22779">See, it's stuff like this that makes me not buy into the criticism.  Freakaholic, I agree, we're probably closer to agreeing than disagreeing, just coming from a glass half empty/half full sort of thing. <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=":)" />  But, then you get this sort of hyperbole:Thousands of options?  Really thousands?  Sorry, no.  We just proved that the list is about three, maybe four options.  This is why I don't buy into this discussion all that much.  Saying that there are "thousands of options" is flat out wrong.  We've just SHOWN it was wrong.  But, BryonD feels free in completely ignoring the last three pages because it doesn't fit with his argument.I had this exact same go around in 3e.  Anything that did not fit into someone's pre-defined conceptions was ignored and any criticism must be taken as gospel.  I didn't buy into it then and I certainly won't buy into it now.Now, if you wanted to say, "I want more options in 4e, how can we do that?" I'm 100% right behind you.  NO problems whatsoever.  That's a laudable goal and a very valid critique.But, "3e has thousands of options for every single concept and 4e doesn't" is, IMO, complete and utter hyperbole.</blockquote>