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
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Shouldn't we wait until passing judgement?
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="Greg K" data-source="post: 3723137" data-attributes="member: 5038"><p>Lets see:</p><p>1) Threshold abilities appeared in the preview on battling a dragon: already used in MMV</p><p>2) Per Encounter: already used in Star Wars, Bo9S</p><p>3) The cleric in the Dragon example on WOTC boards: looks like a maneuver from Bo9S</p><p>4) The 4e Monster design philosophy has been described in the designing a Monster Manual article, covered in Mike Mearl's monster redesigns and been utilized in MMV</p><p>5) We have been told that Bo9S, Star Wars Saga, and MMV are supposedly previews of what we can expect. </p><p></p><p>Therefore, if I have seen per encounter, monster thresholds, and anything else I disliked either in a product or described in an example (the wizard healing the cleric by striking the dragon) and did not like them now, I can reasonably expect not to like those aspects in the new game. </p><p></p><p>And as for other matters of design philosophy, I have played enough games to know if the philosphy agrees with my play style and that of my group (and that is all I care about). I don't have to see the new monster manual to know if I agree with the current philosophy on monster design as described on the WOTC boards or Mearl's monster redesigns. I also don't need to see the final implementation of announced plans like racial ability improvements or gaining new racial abilities with level, the mechanics do not matter. I do not like the idea- I don't like monster classes (Savage Species), I don't like bloodlines (UA), and I don't like racial substitution feats after first level (and only if the feat reflects some cultural difference). </p><p></p><p>If the new game is to include design philosophy and mechanics found in current products that I do not like now, I am quite capable of deciding the impact that their implementation in 4e will have on my enjoyment of the new game. Right now, it is almost all negative.</p><p></p><p>Of course, my reaction is based on the direction WOTC is currently taking as revealed by them. If they scrap many of the current plans and take a new direction during playtesting, then, yes it is possible they might create a 4e that I enjoy.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Greg K, post: 3723137, member: 5038"] Lets see: 1) Threshold abilities appeared in the preview on battling a dragon: already used in MMV 2) Per Encounter: already used in Star Wars, Bo9S 3) The cleric in the Dragon example on WOTC boards: looks like a maneuver from Bo9S 4) The 4e Monster design philosophy has been described in the designing a Monster Manual article, covered in Mike Mearl's monster redesigns and been utilized in MMV 5) We have been told that Bo9S, Star Wars Saga, and MMV are supposedly previews of what we can expect. Therefore, if I have seen per encounter, monster thresholds, and anything else I disliked either in a product or described in an example (the wizard healing the cleric by striking the dragon) and did not like them now, I can reasonably expect not to like those aspects in the new game. And as for other matters of design philosophy, I have played enough games to know if the philosphy agrees with my play style and that of my group (and that is all I care about). I don't have to see the new monster manual to know if I agree with the current philosophy on monster design as described on the WOTC boards or Mearl's monster redesigns. I also don't need to see the final implementation of announced plans like racial ability improvements or gaining new racial abilities with level, the mechanics do not matter. I do not like the idea- I don't like monster classes (Savage Species), I don't like bloodlines (UA), and I don't like racial substitution feats after first level (and only if the feat reflects some cultural difference). If the new game is to include design philosophy and mechanics found in current products that I do not like now, I am quite capable of deciding the impact that their implementation in 4e will have on my enjoyment of the new game. Right now, it is almost all negative. Of course, my reaction is based on the direction WOTC is currently taking as revealed by them. If they scrap many of the current plans and take a new direction during playtesting, then, yes it is possible they might create a 4e that I enjoy. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Shouldn't we wait until passing judgement?
Top
