Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
When did the Fighter become "defender"?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Guest&nbsp; 85555" data-source="post: 5905762"><p>I appreciate the desire yo have others share your preferences, but I think if you stepped back and looked at what people are saying it is generally the whole of 4E doesn't appeal to them and this is usually based on playing the game and reading the books (they may have reached different concusions a out certain things but not unreasonable ones ImO). The idea that people would like it if they didn't just make wild assumptins about it due to the role names also seems a bit unfounded here.</p><p></p><p> I read the books, a played several times. I just don't like it. How many times do I need to keep playing it for people on the other side to accept it isn't for me ( i mean I certainly gave it more tries than other games I disliked). You may not mind the use of roles in 4E, but others feel it is one of the reasons behind their dislike (and I think like any other aspect of the game both sides can make valid points about how much freedom or limitation they place on play). Personally I am not a fan of the way roles are so focused around combat and I don't really agree with the role selection (i never really saw rogues as strikers for example). But that is hardly the only thing about 4e that bugs me. </p><p></p><p>On this subject of words. I dont know what to say except it isn't our fault if the 4e designers failed to communicate clearly. On the one hand we are told you have to look past the words in 4e and use your imagination, on the other we are told that words are the most important aspect of the game and convey all kinds of flavor information. All I know is I never had these issues in earlier editions of the game. </p><p></p><p>Trust me, this isn't hate on my part. 4e does what it does, and lots of people like it. I dont hold it against them for trying to make a more focused version of D&D. It just doesn't appeal to me. If the next edition appeals to me I will buy it, if it doesn't I won't. There seems to be this implication behind the 4e hater label that if you don't accept each new edition of D&D and play it, you are somehow closed minded or attempting to be mean. Sorry to rant a bit here, but I just think that is incorrect. I pretty much only play games that interest me. If that happens to be the current edition of D&D, great. If not, that is fine too. If you love 4E, by all means you should play it and want 5e to reflect your preferences. But some peope jus are not satisfied with it....and I don't think you can talk somene into liking it, anymore than you can talk someone into liking a food that they dislike the taste of.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Guest 85555, post: 5905762"] I appreciate the desire yo have others share your preferences, but I think if you stepped back and looked at what people are saying it is generally the whole of 4E doesn't appeal to them and this is usually based on playing the game and reading the books (they may have reached different concusions a out certain things but not unreasonable ones ImO). The idea that people would like it if they didn't just make wild assumptins about it due to the role names also seems a bit unfounded here. I read the books, a played several times. I just don't like it. How many times do I need to keep playing it for people on the other side to accept it isn't for me ( i mean I certainly gave it more tries than other games I disliked). You may not mind the use of roles in 4E, but others feel it is one of the reasons behind their dislike (and I think like any other aspect of the game both sides can make valid points about how much freedom or limitation they place on play). Personally I am not a fan of the way roles are so focused around combat and I don't really agree with the role selection (i never really saw rogues as strikers for example). But that is hardly the only thing about 4e that bugs me. On this subject of words. I dont know what to say except it isn't our fault if the 4e designers failed to communicate clearly. On the one hand we are told you have to look past the words in 4e and use your imagination, on the other we are told that words are the most important aspect of the game and convey all kinds of flavor information. All I know is I never had these issues in earlier editions of the game. Trust me, this isn't hate on my part. 4e does what it does, and lots of people like it. I dont hold it against them for trying to make a more focused version of D&D. It just doesn't appeal to me. If the next edition appeals to me I will buy it, if it doesn't I won't. There seems to be this implication behind the 4e hater label that if you don't accept each new edition of D&D and play it, you are somehow closed minded or attempting to be mean. Sorry to rant a bit here, but I just think that is incorrect. I pretty much only play games that interest me. If that happens to be the current edition of D&D, great. If not, that is fine too. If you love 4E, by all means you should play it and want 5e to reflect your preferences. But some peope jus are not satisfied with it....and I don't think you can talk somene into liking it, anymore than you can talk someone into liking a food that they dislike the taste of. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
When did the Fighter become "defender"?
Top