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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Patryn of Elvenshae" data-source="post: 5972778" data-attributes="member: 23094">First off, let me say a hearty "Thank you!" for admitting the misunderstanding.  For some reason, it's hard to do on message boards (as I admit to knowing at least as well as most).  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />But I'm going to springboard a bit here, and point out why so many, many people who like 4th Ed go absolutely insane when trying to discuss it and its mechanics and its DMing tools, etc., around people who don't.  (And, for the record, while I really, really like 4th Ed., I've actually played it a really, really small amount, because most of my gaming group decided they didn't want to buy all new books, and so we stuck with 3.5E and later Pathfinder for the most part.  "Most" of my "4E Experience" is actually taking pieces of 4E design and philosophy and backfitting it into a sort of 3.75 framework while DMing, and it's worked, I think, really, really well in that fashion.  And, because I need to use the word more often in this paragraph: really.)Anyway, back to my point.You, an admitted non-4E player, were introduced somewhat off-handedly to a 4E concept (player-generated magic-item wishlists) and, on the basis of that alone, felt confident enough in your understanding to lampoon the idea with a fairly ridiculous example and declare, in no uncertain terms, your opposition to it appearing in D&D Next.Do you see why this is counterproductive to good discussion, and why it hurts the efforts to get D&D players of all stripes together and discuss their favorite parts of the various editions, in order to make Next as good as it can be?</blockquote>

Verification