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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aribar" data-source="post: 6533006" data-attributes="member: 6777974">Can you elaborate on what you mean by "board game edition"? It doesn't make sense to me. As someone who has played since AD&D, the only difference I see between 4E and the earlier editions is that the books were restructured so that all the player options are actually contained in the PHB instead of occasionally placed in the DMG or sometimes even the MM.The grid was more important in 4E than other editions, but no edition has properly supported gridless play. I've seen plenty of arguments over whether a melee class could make it to the enemy (or if a sneaky melee class had enough movement to avoid attacks of opportunity to flank enemies for backstabs), or wizards saying "I cast fireball so it doesn't hit the melee fighters" and the DM being forced to decide. Yeah, it technically works and plenty of people do it... But through no help of the actual rules. Knowing a human rogue can move 30" doesn't help me at all determine if she can actually skirt combat, whereas other RPG systems that use zones or actual rules to determine that could.Also, didn't 4E sell more than Pathfinder for the first half of its lifespan when 4E books were actually being published? I will sadly admit Wizards appears to be chasing Pathfinder with this edition, but it makes no sense. Pathfinder stole the rules and D&D 3E's audience and Paizo's edition warring advertising tactics have made a relatively loyal fanbase. People seem to want "Their favorite edition: Take 2", which Pathfinder does with all the new players 3E brought in and will likely do in their new edition. It would be more logical for Wizards to get a new audience than try and win back the one they lost.</blockquote>

Verification