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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GregoryOatmeal" data-source="post: 5707650" data-attributes="member: 6667661">Clearly these issues aren't even on the same order of magnitude. I've never actually seen a player quit a game over a house rule. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but I've yet to see it. Usually it's over disagreement about how the rule is implemented or what kind of calls the DM makes. I may be turned off by a homebrew but I'll usually try it. Small issues can be divisive and players will squabble about anything, but a new edition is an entirely different level.Who said past editions weren't divisive? You seem to be agreeing with me. It just gets worse as more come out and they break more radically from past games.First no one said that. That's silly. But really, divisions give me headaches and mean I constantly have to switch between different 300 page rulebooks whenever I play D&D. They're all just an impediment of rules and resources and disparate backgrounds that make it harder for the group to do what we all want to do. Do you have no sympathy for that?But you could give any game an internet presence and DDI supportIf there was just one good stable game, yeah, sure. If I could point people at 4E and casual gamers would say "yeah, I played that game when I started playing D&D, I have resources for that, I'm not scared of those rules", then yeah, that'd be friggin great. Even if we switched to a different game three months later it would be a great starting point. And it would inevitably happen more frequently if the game remained in print. Not universal familiarity, but increased familiarity.</blockquote>

Verification