Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Khairn" data-source="post: 3937481" data-attributes="member: 20153">Ditto, except my game is in the Silver Marches.I really wish I could say the changes excite me, but I can't.&nbsp; I find most (not all) of the changes to be very contrived and poorly implemented with an overall feeling of being forced.&nbsp; In addition to that, if I want to start a game in the &quot;New FR&quot;, the changes being made will effectively render my collection of FR gaming material (fluff not crunch) redundant and ultimately useless.I really don't understand that arguement.&nbsp; Why is it &quot;daunting&quot;?&nbsp; I'm not saying that you are wrong, as its a perfectly valid point of view.&nbsp; But isn't it the job of a GM to tailor whatever setting is being played to meet the needs of the players?&nbsp; If the players at the table don't like reading lots of options and history ... then the GM should only work from a few elements and not include the entire realm.&nbsp; Isn't it better to have a lot of information and background that GM's and players can use at their own pace, rather than too little information?As a FR Fan, I believe that these changes will ultimately be accepted and the storm of criticism will die down.&nbsp; But I also believe that many customers are justifiably angry over the changes and that the FR changes are further fragmenting the player base, just as 4E is also doing.Just an opinion.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Khairn, post: 3937481, member: 20153"] Ditto, except my game is in the Silver Marches. I really wish I could say the changes excite me, but I can't. I find most (not all) of the changes to be very contrived and poorly implemented with an overall feeling of being forced. In addition to that, if I want to start a game in the "New FR", the changes being made will effectively render my collection of FR gaming material (fluff not crunch) redundant and ultimately useless. I really don't understand that arguement. Why is it "daunting"? I'm not saying that you are wrong, as its a perfectly valid point of view. But isn't it the job of a GM to tailor whatever setting is being played to meet the needs of the players? If the players at the table don't like reading lots of options and history ... then the GM should only work from a few elements and not include the entire realm. Isn't it better to have a lot of information and background that GM's and players can use at their own pace, rather than too little information? As a FR Fan, I believe that these changes will ultimately be accepted and the storm of criticism will die down. But I also believe that many customers are justifiably angry over the changes and that the FR changes are further fragmenting the player base, just as 4E is also doing. Just an opinion. [/QUOTE]

Verification