Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 9526443" data-attributes="member: 7023840">Well, I didn't forget it (referencing it a few times to note that the nine-point system was mostly, but not completely, unchanged after it was introduced).I didn't delve into it for two reasons-1. I mean .... I try to stay as neutral as possible about 4e, which just seems to anger everyone. So I try not to discuss it too much unless it's essential and germane to my topic. Much like I use the shorthand Peterson quote for my feelings about &quot;credit&quot; when it comes to Arneson/Gygax, I think my feelings about 4e generally are, &quot;4e was the Apple Newton of D&amp;D- a product that both had to exist, was necessary for the future, and couldn't succeed. I am glad it existed, I think that the rules are great, but I also think it was doomed from the start, and it's not my bag, baby. But I am glad it brought joy to the people that love it. I hope that it gets the most awesome retroclone ever for those people and a thriving community.&quot; BUT THAT IS JUST AN OPINION.2. More importantly, I know my limitations. I have never researched the alignment system in 4e or why it changed or understand what impacts it had, so my bloviations on that topic would be even more uninformed! I'll spare y'all that. Looks like you and [USER=2209]@Voadam[/USER] and [USER=5142]@Aldarc[/USER] can hit those issues, so please feel free to discuss anything you want about 4e's alignment system. FWIW, I think &quot;unaligned&quot; makes sense, but I don't have anything insightful to say about it. I'll leave that to people with more knowledge.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Snarf Zagyg, post: 9526443, member: 7023840"] Well, I didn't forget it (referencing it a few times to note that the nine-point system was mostly, but not completely, unchanged after it was introduced). I didn't delve into it for two reasons- 1. I mean .... I try to stay as neutral as possible about 4e, which just seems to anger everyone. So I try not to discuss it too much unless it's essential and germane to my topic. Much like I use the shorthand Peterson quote for my feelings about "credit" when it comes to Arneson/Gygax, I think my feelings about 4e generally are, "4e was the Apple Newton of D&D- a product that both had to exist, was necessary for the future, and couldn't succeed. I am glad it existed, I think that the rules are great, but I also think it was doomed from the start, and it's not my bag, baby. But I am glad it brought joy to the people that love it. I hope that it gets the most awesome retroclone ever for those people and a thriving community." BUT THAT IS JUST AN OPINION. 2. More importantly, I know my limitations. I have never researched the alignment system in 4e or why it changed or understand what impacts it had, so my bloviations on that topic would be even more uninformed! I'll spare y'all that. Looks like you and [USER=2209]@Voadam[/USER] and [USER=5142]@Aldarc[/USER] can hit those issues, so please feel free to discuss anything you want about 4e's alignment system. FWIW, I think "unaligned" makes sense, but I don't have anything insightful to say about it. I'll leave that to people with more knowledge. [/QUOTE]

Verification