Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 7042879" data-attributes="member: 6696971">Quick chime in to hopefully help clarify (before I hit the sack).   [MENTION=87792]Neonchameleon[/MENTION] and  [MENTION=23935]Nagol[/MENTION] are referring to 4e's development (the collapse of its initial iteration Orcus) and the subsequent fallout of putting together 4e from its ashes on short notice with no extended timetable.  Despite that, it still delivered an amazingly beautiful and working action-adventure, Romatic/Heroic Fantasy game (which matured/refined at a pace and to a degree in subsequent years like no other game I've ever seen).Neonchameleon is a huge fan of 4e (even at its release, despite some gripes). Nagol is not a fan of 4e, but in the above post he is just commenting on 4e development timeline (as laid out by Neon), not 4e at release (though he isn't a fan of it at release).  That being said, Nagol is the only 4e detractor on these boards of which I appreciate his commentary on the subject because (a) he has an expansive breadth of play experience outside of D&D and (b) he's always been able to intellectually honestly (and thoroughly...even if I don't agree on certain points) elucidate his position while (c) not falling for or expressing cargo cult/groupthink edition war memes.  Beyond that there is the fact that (d), 4e does have serious problems delivering the finer/granular points, or at least in the incarnation he prefers, of his preferred playstyle (hexcrawl-serial world exploration stressing strategic resource management, eschewing gonzo martial capacity, yet still with relative Fighter:Wizard parity).  4e's action resolution mechanics/PC build mechanics/play principles are very much at tension with hexcrawl dynamics, serial world exploration (it is a closed-scene-based game), classic D&D strategic resource management (yet has its own iteration), removing gonzo martial capacity requires a fair bit of refluffing (but doable), but it definitely achieves Fighter:Wizard parity!So I have some sympathies (even though if I ran a 4e game for him he would want to build a time machine so he could travel back to 2008 and slap the <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/angel.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":angel:" title="Angel    :angel:" data-shortname=":angel:" /> out of himself!)</blockquote>

Verification