Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Kzach" data-source="post: 4054920" data-attributes="member: 56189">Most of my reasons have been stated in threads I've started here recently but hey, I'm not averse to repeating myself <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&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />To sum up, basically it's as if the current group of designers read my mind and applied all my ideas to the new edition. Pretty much everything they've done or said, I've agreed with or thought was a great idea. For me it's a no-brainer to pick up 4E as it really is the ruleset I've been waiting for, for a long time.On reading the responses to the &quot;Why won't you switch?&quot; thread, I was surprised to see that a lot of people felt insulted by the previews and the whole, &quot;Your game is broken,&quot; spiel. Although I can see where they're coming from in the sense of their reasoning, I can't honestly say I feel that reasoning is logical and justified.I say this because I've had the opposite reaction to their spiel and marketing. What they've been saying is one of the reasons I'm in the 'fanboy' camp.One other thing that really cemented my already firm decision to pick up the new edition was the constant use of the basic concept of, &quot;Does this rule enhance the fun of the game? Why is this rule here? What is it's function and purpose? Does it add or subtract to the game? What can we do to make it more fun and easier to run?&quot;This set of questions I honestly don't believe have ever really been a core part of designing any of the new editions. They might have been in the background as absent thoughts or occasionally have popped up with one of the more glaring, game-bogging rules, but other than that, were an after-thought rather than the primary motivating factor for change.I've heard accusations that 4E is change for the sake of change and I couldn't disagree more. Other editions have been far and away more so than this one, given the above core philosophy for changing any rule.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Kzach, post: 4054920, member: 56189"] Most of my reasons have been stated in threads I've started here recently but hey, I'm not averse to repeating myself :) To sum up, basically it's as if the current group of designers read my mind and applied all my ideas to the new edition. Pretty much everything they've done or said, I've agreed with or thought was a great idea. For me it's a no-brainer to pick up 4E as it really is the ruleset I've been waiting for, for a long time. On reading the responses to the "Why won't you switch?" thread, I was surprised to see that a lot of people felt insulted by the previews and the whole, "Your game is broken," spiel. Although I can see where they're coming from in the sense of their reasoning, I can't honestly say I feel that reasoning is logical and justified. I say this because I've had the opposite reaction to their spiel and marketing. What they've been saying is one of the reasons I'm in the 'fanboy' camp. One other thing that really cemented my already firm decision to pick up the new edition was the constant use of the basic concept of, "Does this rule enhance the fun of the game? Why is this rule here? What is it's function and purpose? Does it add or subtract to the game? What can we do to make it more fun and easier to run?" This set of questions I honestly don't believe have ever really been a core part of designing any of the new editions. They might have been in the background as absent thoughts or occasionally have popped up with one of the more glaring, game-bogging rules, but other than that, were an after-thought rather than the primary motivating factor for change. I've heard accusations that 4E is change for the sake of change and I couldn't disagree more. Other editions have been far and away more so than this one, given the above core philosophy for changing any rule. [/QUOTE]

Verification