Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5456017" data-attributes="member: 42582">I don't really agree with this.And I should add - I don't count you as an edition warrer (am I editing my memory here?).Anyway, to avoid the embarassment of talking about you any more in my reply, I'll talk about Lanefan instead (who might still be reading, but at least it's a bit more third person!).Lanefan and I clearly have some different preferences in RPGs. He has no interest in 4e. He has explained on various occasions why not. I could probably get into his houseruled AD&D if I tried, but I'm certainly not knocking down his door to get a copy of it. For the reasons I've posted on many occasions, I find that 4e better delivers to me what I'm looking for from an RPG. Lanefan likes 9-point alignment. I don't really like alignment at all, but prefer 4e's approach to AD&D's. We each have our reasons.But Lanefan and I have had lots of friendly and productive exchanges about GMing styles, playstyles, things we like and don't like. We've compared experiences running Night's Dark Terror. When we disagree, we tell each other why, and respectfully move on.I don't see that as edition warring, because Lanefan has never tried to tell me I'm doing it wrong. And I can tell from his posts, and the duration of his campaign, and his obvious enthusiasm for and experience with the game, that he's not doing it wrong either.</blockquote>