Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="GreyLord" data-source="post: 5362246" data-attributes="member: 4348">Actually, I don't consider 3e OR 4e as AD&amp;D or D&amp;D or really their continuation.&nbsp; 3e effectively killed the sacred cow.&nbsp; What I see is the arguments in relation to what used to be the AD&amp;D vs. all the other new systems coming out...then transferred over to the AD&amp;D vs 3e...and now days to the 3e vs. 4e crowd.&nbsp; These arguments were against what was seen as the inherent weaknesses of a classbased/archetypal system that was level based instead of skill packages or stat increases.&nbsp; 4e has made a return to that state.&nbsp; Most of the other options now in 4e actually were included in 3e as possibilites, but normally not part of the core rules (book of nine swords, unearthed arcana, incarnum, you have powers, flat XP for monsters, etc.) and can recreate 4e in 3e overall...heck you could even say the idea for rituals was based on some 3e ideas (much like a LOT of 3e was based on the earlier work for 2.5 with the Class Options rules...where you see a lot of the rolemaster influences starting to roll in).&nbsp; However the strong class/archetype was something that is definately different, and is what is REALLY killed and changed in 4e.&nbsp;(edit: and as I noted, though many really old timers argued for a shift back into this archetype class idea, I didn't see it as an overall demand in the market, so I'm not certain WHY they chose to go that direction.&nbsp; Personally I saw it going to opposite direction of that with people wanting even MORE options and more open gaming overall, but I don't have survey numbers.&nbsp; That's just a personal observation of what I thought the market would be going.&nbsp; I DO like 4e however, and the class archetypes...but I wouldn't say I'm any majority at all in that I like the Archetype RPG systems).So not really that 4e is a continuation of the 1e/2e lines...I don't see that at all...if anything I'd say C&amp;C or Palladium is closer to the AD&amp;D lines (and we know how Palladium has gone in years previous in regards to TSR) than 4e.&nbsp; I am only saying the same lines are drawn and the attractions seem to be similar in how they are drawn...hence the same arguments and the same types of groups that we've seen for ages in the past...except instead of AD&amp;D/Rolemaster and Gurps and other systems being hashed out, we now have 3e vs. 4e and old timers (though old timers can also be anti-4e as well) as lines in the sand as well these days hashing out those SAME arguments.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="GreyLord, post: 5362246, member: 4348"] Actually, I don't consider 3e OR 4e as AD&D or D&D or really their continuation. 3e effectively killed the sacred cow. What I see is the arguments in relation to what used to be the AD&D vs. all the other new systems coming out...then transferred over to the AD&D vs 3e...and now days to the 3e vs. 4e crowd. These arguments were against what was seen as the inherent weaknesses of a classbased/archetypal system that was level based instead of skill packages or stat increases. 4e has made a return to that state. Most of the other options now in 4e actually were included in 3e as possibilites, but normally not part of the core rules (book of nine swords, unearthed arcana, incarnum, you have powers, flat XP for monsters, etc.) and can recreate 4e in 3e overall...heck you could even say the idea for rituals was based on some 3e ideas (much like a LOT of 3e was based on the earlier work for 2.5 with the Class Options rules...where you see a lot of the rolemaster influences starting to roll in). However the strong class/archetype was something that is definately different, and is what is REALLY killed and changed in 4e. (edit: and as I noted, though many really old timers argued for a shift back into this archetype class idea, I didn't see it as an overall demand in the market, so I'm not certain WHY they chose to go that direction. Personally I saw it going to opposite direction of that with people wanting even MORE options and more open gaming overall, but I don't have survey numbers. That's just a personal observation of what I thought the market would be going. I DO like 4e however, and the class archetypes...but I wouldn't say I'm any majority at all in that I like the Archetype RPG systems). So not really that 4e is a continuation of the 1e/2e lines...I don't see that at all...if anything I'd say C&C or Palladium is closer to the AD&D lines (and we know how Palladium has gone in years previous in regards to TSR) than 4e. I am only saying the same lines are drawn and the attractions seem to be similar in how they are drawn...hence the same arguments and the same types of groups that we've seen for ages in the past...except instead of AD&D/Rolemaster and Gurps and other systems being hashed out, we now have 3e vs. 4e and old timers (though old timers can also be anti-4e as well) as lines in the sand as well these days hashing out those SAME arguments. [/QUOTE]

Verification