NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6092292" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Oh, its not that hard to sort it out. Go read the back history of the DDN threads going back to when they were first set up. A couple hundred VERY loud people showed up to bash on everything 4e. Of course a giant set of long and mostly kind of pointless debates ensued, but it was always pretty clear in my mind that whomever was actually putting together the DDN material seemed rather congruent in their thinking to some of the less radical "grognards". The logic is basically "D&D was best in 19xx (some number usually between 77 and 92), so it should be just like that pretty much." Not surprisingly that's basically pretty much what DDN is. Clearly Mike and Co didn't quite dare to just go back and say "it is 1992 again, its 2e except with roll high and new saves etc." I get the impression from reading his columns and etc that this would be Mike's choice. Frankly IMHO there isn't anything resembling 4e in DDN in a meaningful way. There are many 3e-isms, but they aren't so far specifically creating a coherent 3.x-like game either. Certainly the design is cognizant of 3.x and 4e, but fundamentally the designers are listening to people who want to go back and play 2e in its heyday. Lots of us are just not interested in going back there. Clearly we're not the target audience for this game, and honestly being thrown a bone like "gosh, but it has hit points" is worse than nothing, lol. I want to just say to WotC/Mike/etc "Look, you WANT TO MAKE 2e, so DO IT! Don't make any excuses or lip service to something else, just SAY IT AND DO IT." I can respect that. DDN as it is just annoys and frustrates many of us.</p></blockquote><p></p>

Verification