Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5459676" data-attributes="member: 42582">I'm personally not the biggest fan of that slogan, but it tends not to cheese me off because it tends to be used in a self-deprecating way. Whereas the assertion that "4e is really a skirmish came" is normally used in a context that gerenates an implication of superiority on the part of the speaker.Now that doesn't irritate me at all, for at least three reasons. First, it's very clearly a statement of preference.Second, it doesn't assert that 4e is a skirmish game. Rather, it just presupposes the obvious truth that the 4e combat enging is a tactical minis engine. And I don't disupte that - I've read the rles and played the game - I just dispute (i) that the combat engine exhausts the game, and (ii) that a combat engine of that sort is a necessary impediment to roleplaying. In fact, I find that the combat engine actually feeds roleplaying at my table - but that's primarily a truth about me, not about 4e.Third, my familiarity with your posting history on these topics makes me fairly confident that you're don't have an agenda of denying that 4e is a serious roleplaying game.(And fourth - my four year old daughter loves your "dancing boy" picture and makes me scroll back up to your posts so she can see it again whenever she's watching over my shoulder while I'm on ENworld.)</blockquote>