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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TheAuldGrump" data-source="post: 5811407" data-attributes="member: 6957">Exactly - saying something is more fun is fine. Saying that something isn't fun is just asking to be kicked.I would have disagreed with WotC if they had said that 4e was 'more' fun, than 3.5, but it would not have offended me.Instead they tried to tell me that the game that I had been running for the better part of a decade, and enjoyed a great deal, was 'not fun'.Telling me that D&D is not a game about 'traipsing through the fairy rings' - the week after my players' characters had done exactly that was a classic of bad timing.... Telling me that 'D&D is a game about combat!' Coming perilously close to saying that D&D is a game that is only a game about combat, was putting limitations on what WotC was going to consider 'fun' in the new edition.Telling me that talking to the guards at the gate 'isn't fun' - with no qualifier, was just plain wrong.But, as I keep trying to say - WotC has admitted to those mistakes, it is now some of the more vocal f4natics that are trying to deny that these were mistakes.I am not even going to pretend that everyone hewed to the idea that D&D is all about combat, or that PC should not stop to gossip with the guards at the gate. A lot of GMs are more than willing to adjust their games.It was the denial that those things were fun, not the rules, that offended me.I am willing to forgive WotC, at least enough to look at 5e. But there are folks that are still trying to fight an edition war that has already been lost. 4e had a failure of marketing. And I think that that failure in marketing had a great deal more to do with the failure of 4e than the rules themselves. I do not like those rules, but plenty of other people do.WotC has learned a lesson. They are being a great deal more conciliatory this time.Move on.The Auld Grump</blockquote>

Verification