Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6100169" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Your argument is essentially "Mike was responsible for the way 4e is designed, so you must therefor be happy that he is designing 5e since it will thus be designed with the same sensibilities" and I'm simply pointing out that MIKE WAS NOT IN CHARGE OF 4E, he DID NOT decide what did or didn't go into it. That was the responsibility of Rob Heinsoo, Bill Slavicek, and whomever, not including Mike. I've written a lot of software in my life, and just because I came up with some clever algorithm to use in a given application or wrote a piece of the UI doesn't mean I was the guy who decided what tools or architecture to use, or even if my own contributions were acceptable or how they finally turned out. The point being your argument fails because MIKE wasn't the one deciding what 4e's goals were or what it would ultimately do or look like. Thus the notion that I must find DDN's design to be in the hands of someone who's ideas and opinions I agree with is dubious at best. I pointed out in my last post a number of reasons why I would NOT think that Mike is the guy I would pick to make the game I would want to buy. The most central of them all of course, which needn't be stated, is that DDN is indeed nothing like what I want to see, and is in fact VERY much looking like a sort of AD&D rehash IMHO. Seemed like a pretty good argument to me and no amount of telling me how many 4e books he helped with changes the fact that other people were telling him what to do and deciding how the game worked overall.</p></blockquote><p></p>

Verification