Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5354116" data-attributes="member: 4937">I don't think we disagree all that much.&nbsp; We are just talking abit cross purpose.&nbsp; In the details though, I think we are much on the same page.For example, we are very much in agreement there and it echos much of what I've been saying for the past few pages.&nbsp; The point where I think you fail to understand me, is that while that is very much true, that point of failure is not really very important with respect to attracting new players to the game.&nbsp; And, were that really the issue, then 3e had a very high degree of 'casual realism' (obligatory citation here) and there would be no reason to think we'd need another sort of game to attract new players.See, we do agree.Unmodified, I might do the same.&nbsp; But, more likely, I'd take my own modified version of 1e that takes lessons from 20+ years of playing D&amp;D in several editions to smooth out the problems with the system I know about.&nbsp;&nbsp; I look at 4e though and don't have a clue what I'd do to fix the problems I see save gird my loins and just trudge on bearing them in as manly of a fashion as I could.&nbsp; Which might point to the main difference between me and you being how much we expect or want to be able to tinker with the system.&nbsp; There are some other differences of course in our tastes, and that's a matter of taste and so I'm not knocking you for your choice of 4e.&nbsp;&nbsp; It's just that not only is it not the game for me, but its so designed such that I can't turn it into a game for me.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 5354116, member: 4937"] I don't think we disagree all that much. We are just talking abit cross purpose. In the details though, I think we are much on the same page. For example, we are very much in agreement there and it echos much of what I've been saying for the past few pages. The point where I think you fail to understand me, is that while that is very much true, that point of failure is not really very important with respect to attracting new players to the game. And, were that really the issue, then 3e had a very high degree of 'casual realism' (obligatory citation here) and there would be no reason to think we'd need another sort of game to attract new players. See, we do agree. Unmodified, I might do the same. But, more likely, I'd take my own modified version of 1e that takes lessons from 20+ years of playing D&D in several editions to smooth out the problems with the system I know about. I look at 4e though and don't have a clue what I'd do to fix the problems I see save gird my loins and just trudge on bearing them in as manly of a fashion as I could. Which might point to the main difference between me and you being how much we expect or want to be able to tinker with the system. There are some other differences of course in our tastes, and that's a matter of taste and so I'm not knocking you for your choice of 4e. It's just that not only is it not the game for me, but its so designed such that I can't turn it into a game for me. [/QUOTE]

Verification