D&D 4E The problem with 4e

[GnomeWorks]

You keep using that word, I don't think it means what you think it means.

And you're just being a troll who can't actually provide a rational argument against what I'm saying, so instead, you decide to mock me.

Quit being a tool. Either man up and provide solid arguments against what I'm saying, or get out of the thread. I'm getting tired of wasting my time writing out responses to you, when you're not doing anything worthy of the effort.

 

[GnomeWorks]

I would suggest that you lower your sensitivities a little so as not to appear uptight and rude on these forums. Sorry for the confusion, but I will understand when it happens again, because that is the nature of anonymous text based communication.

I am insulted left and right. Folk attribute "hatred of 4e" as amongst my beliefs and tenets, when I have stated no such thing.

You should know darn well by now that crap like what I quoted you on aren't taken as funny. It's not amusing to be constantly mocked by people like hong and you. So kindly knock it off.

 

[PrecociousApprentice]

The funniest part of your response was that I was actually mocking myself.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Thasmodius, Gnomeworks, please stop posting in this thread.

-Hyp.
(Moderator)

 

[RefinedBean]

I'm new to the whole Gamist/Simulationist thing, but...

If a game gives you a set of rules but then gives ONE rule that trumps all, i.e. "The DM can change things as he/she wills so that everyone has fun," isn't that the ultimate expression of simulation AND gamism?

Tog e go bog e, people...take it easy, and try to flow with whatever system you're given.

Personal opinion, 4E allows for a more creative and group-oriented flow of ideas and organic play, while 3E is geared more towards meticulous character design and careful level planning.

Both are good, which is why I play both every week.

 

[PrecociousApprentice]

That was generally why I was poking fun at myself.

 

[Vegepygmy]

If a game gives you a set of rules but then gives ONE rule that trumps all, i.e. "The DM can change things as he/she wills so that everyone has fun," isn't that the ultimate expression of simulation AND gamism?

No. That rule is as anti-simulationist as you can get.

Here's a link to a good overview of GDS theory: http://www.darkshire.net/~jhkim/rpg/theory/threefold/faq_v1.html

Other people will direct you to GNS theory, which I personally don't find as useful.