Was Reading My Mentzer Expert Rules and What did I see?

[Hussar]

Right you are. 4E says basically the same thing. I wonder why it took over two hundred pages to say what the Cook/Marsh Expert says in 64.

Oh, hey, "inspired by" is not the same thing as "directly compatible."

I'm not trying to say that it is. They are different games, of course. What I am trying to say is that the whole hyperbole about how it's "not D&D" and "They've totally changed the game so that it is unrecognizable" is just that. Hyperbole. Heck there's another thread right here which is saying EXACTLY the same thing I'm saying.

So, no, I'm not alone in this. A number of people do see the similarities. Mechanically? Oh yeah, very different. No argument there from me. But thematically? This is D&D to me.

 

[aurance]

All I know is the bald caster guy has had his hands replaced by glowing balls with floating tater tots inside them.

 

[RFisher]

So, no, I'm not alone in this. A number of people do see the similarities. Mechanically? Oh yeah, very different. No argument there from me. But thematically? This is D&D to me.

If I concede the thematic similarities, does that mean that I cannot feel that the mechanical changes are enough to make it “not D&D” to me?

 

[bagger245]

Hehe, same here.

Same theme and all, but different playstyle?

 

[airwalkrr]

I see an Area 51 alien crossed with a goat.

 

[Hussar]

See, I just don't get the "not D&D" thing. What's "not D&D" about it? In the thread I linked above, there's a very good list of the similarities to the mechanics as well. Ah well, I guess it's all well and good. I wasn't playing D&D, according to lots of people, when I played 3e, so, I guess, when and if I play 4e, I'll be happy not playing D&D again.

For me, the fact that I'm doing roughly the same things - exploring, searching, fighting monsters, getting loot, expanding my character's powers, - that's enough D&D for me. I guess I'm just easy to please.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

For me, the fact that I'm doing roughly the same things - exploring, searching, fighting monsters, getting loot, expanding my character's powers...

I can do that with Rolemaster, but it's not the same thing. Even if Rolemaster were purchased by WotC and released as 5th edition D&D, so that it could validly be called "D&D," it wouldn't be the same thing.

 

[Amphimir Míriel]

Feh, so tiefling's were always that horny eh? Am I the only one who thinks enormous goat horns make tieflings look more ridiculous than evil? How about we try other anatomical features common among barnyard animals? A big coat of sheepy wool? A chicken beak? Ooh! How about a curly piggy tail! Sheesh.

Well, as a suggestion, if goat horns and reddish skin are too much for you, perhaps Tieflings in your world could look just like regular humans, except that all of them have thin, arching eyebrows, and all the males have goatees or Fu-manchu moustaches...

 

[Amphimir Míriel]

Right you are. 4E says basically the same thing. I wonder why it took over two hundred pages to say what the Cook/Marsh Expert says in 64.

Because it also has lots of good advise on how to deal with cheeky players

 

[Hussar]

I can do that with Rolemaster, but it's not the same thing. Even if Rolemaster were purchased by WotC and released as 5th edition D&D, so that it could validly be called "D&D," it wouldn't be the same thing.

Well, maybe you can explain this to me then.

Was I playing D&D when I was using Tome of Magic and Book of Nine Swords?

If I was, then how am I not playing D&D when using 4e?