Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Henry" data-source="post: 4521447" data-attributes="member: 158">I pretty much categorically disagree with that conjecture. If they didn't like it, they wouldn't have been playing it day in and day out, at conventions, at their homes, in the office, etc. Mike Mearls wouldn't have started up an OD&amp;D game just for the fun of it, among some of the office staff. Whatever direction they took the game in for the 4th edition, I cannot say that they don't like D&amp;D, because there's no evidence for it, other than the game not being to your personal liking, or my personal liking.Heck, find out how many people over at Dragonsfoot would say, &quot;I like ALL D&amp;D from 1974 to 2005.&quot; Doubt you'll find very many, though some might. (Catch me over there on the right day and you'll have at least one.)On the other hand, what's so different between someone who doesn't like it after 2005, and someone who doesn't like it after 1999? or 1988? Game philosophy changed pretty radically between 1997 and 2000, too. The 2E change is one thing, it wasn't as drastic in terms of mechanics as the change from 2 to 3, or from 3 to 4. However someone who liked it up until 4 has a lot in common with someone who liked it up until 3 -- pretty vast change in systems and design. The only difference now is the OGL impetus to keep going with what we already have, which is a great thing. It was a great thing for not just 3E, but for the versions which came before, too, as the so-called &quot;retro clones&quot; have discovered new life among people playing them, too.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Henry, post: 4521447, member: 158"] I pretty much categorically disagree with that conjecture. If they didn't like it, they wouldn't have been playing it day in and day out, at conventions, at their homes, in the office, etc. Mike Mearls wouldn't have started up an OD&D game just for the fun of it, among some of the office staff. Whatever direction they took the game in for the 4th edition, I cannot say that they don't like D&D, because there's no evidence for it, other than the game not being to your personal liking, or my personal liking. Heck, find out how many people over at Dragonsfoot would say, "I like ALL D&D from 1974 to 2005." Doubt you'll find very many, though some might. (Catch me over there on the right day and you'll have at least one.) On the other hand, what's so different between someone who doesn't like it after 2005, and someone who doesn't like it after 1999? or 1988? Game philosophy changed pretty radically between 1997 and 2000, too. The 2E change is one thing, it wasn't as drastic in terms of mechanics as the change from 2 to 3, or from 3 to 4. However someone who liked it up until 4 has a lot in common with someone who liked it up until 3 -- pretty vast change in systems and design. The only difference now is the OGL impetus to keep going with what we already have, which is a great thing. It was a great thing for not just 3E, but for the versions which came before, too, as the so-called "retro clones" have discovered new life among people playing them, too. [/QUOTE]

Verification