Quote from: Sacrosanct;683068Or in other words, "We don't hold ourselves to the same standards as everyone else."

Shocking, I know.

Yup. It's the old "4e is EXACTLY LIKE old D&D in EVERY WAY so that there is NO REASON to ever play any other version of the game."

While simultaneously being "SO MUCH BETTER in every way and NOT AT ALL LIKE old D&D which SUCKED in every possible way."

I call it schrodinger's game. It is both 'totally the same game' and 'unlike every other version' depending on the needs of the argument and audience.

Are people still confusing preference for objective good or bad in games?

Game I enjoy = Good game
 Game I do not enjoy = Bad game



Duh!

Quote from: Piestrio;683073Yup. It's the old "4e is EXACTLY LIKE old D&D in EVERY WAY so that there is NO REASON to ever play any other version of the game."

While simultaneously being "SO MUCH BETTER in every way and NOT AT ALL LIKE old D&D which SUCKED in every possible way."

I call it schrodinger's game. It is both 'totally the same game' and 'unlike every other version' depending on the needs of the argument and audience.

Yeah but there are always people like this in any argument. It's not a '4e fans' thing.

Quote from: soviet;683076Yeah but there are always people like this in any argument. It's not a '4e fans' thing.

However, it is a 4venger and 4ron thing.

Quote from: 1989;682983Difference is:

- people still played 2e, though they complained about some things (demons/devils/assasins/gary is gone)

- people didn't play 4e. They left. In large numbers.

Yeah you keep telling yourself that.  Nobody left 2e to play 1e or 3e or other games.  They all just kept playing 2e, even when other options presented themselves.  2e is uber popular!

1989, more people play 4e, than play 2e, right now.  You'd have to be a giant homer (to borrow a sports term) of epic proportions to believe otherwise.  And since both are roughly the same level of "in print" right now as each other, that should tell you that you crowing about how awesome koolio 2e is and how 4e suxor looks pretty silly.  You're a fan of the one edition of D&D which is roughly equally embarrassing in the amount of distaste it seems to generate amongst some fans.  D&D players fled 2e in droves, much like they fled 4e in droves.  In other words, if you view 4e as shit for people leaving it to play something else, then your shit stinks too.

Mind you, I'm not nearly as comfortable with "narrative handwaving to make this effect work" as I was in, say, 2009.

Quote from: LibraryLass;683072And it didn't occur to you that the WOTC boards are full of dribbling retards?

And it didn't occur to you that these were the same people on here, and TBP, and every other forum that made these claims?  They happened to make them on WotC forums, but they are the same people as every other forum.


Seriously, I really don't get the aversion to holding the 4e experts accountable for their statements.  They are the ones that made them, not me.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;683007Some of the loudest 4vengers themselves were the ones who said that fighter abilities replicate spells.  That isn't a phrase us "haters" came up with.  Don't try to convince us we're wrong; it's not our phrase.  Talk to people like TCO.  He's the one who said it.

So let me see if I understand your position here.  Some jackass said something stupid, claiming his views were representative of all fans of that game.  And you think he is a jackass too, and would not put much respect into his RPG views in general.  But, because it satisfies your current admittedly biased position on a particular issue, you will put 100% full faith and credit into the words of the jackass you previously wouldn't trust as far as you could throw him?

Yeah, fuck that Sacrosanct.  That's a load of bullshit.  Fighters did not replicate spells.  If some jackass said they did, he's wrong.  He's not more trustworthy for this topic because it feeds your admitted bias, any more than he's more trustworthy on a topic where he runs counter to your bias.

Quote from: Piestrio;683016Why are we still talking about a shitty game that was nearly universally hated by D&D players and killed by the publisher after a desperate scramble to get older players back barely a couple years into its run?

It's dead guys.

It's irrelevant.

Dustbin of history and all that.

LOL.

Nearly universally hated by D&D players?

Where do you get this shit? All those thousands of DDI subscribes don't count now?  Come on man, lots of players liked 4e.  It being "not profitable enough for Hasbro" is not the same as "nobody liked it".  Which you know.  You were, I assume, just trolling.

Quote from: Mistwell;683091LOL.

Nearly universally hated by D&D players?

I presume he means the old school taliban.

I'm finding myself agreeing somewhat with Mistwell...someone check if the stars are right.

He's correct on that point. 4e was successful by RPG standards, just not successful by Hasbro/WotC standards. It's like saying that Windows Vista didn't sell because it was pulled so quickly - but of course it sold like hot cakes, it's Windows after all, the biggest guy on the OS market, except it did not sell as well, was flawed, and caused enough bad marketing, that it was in the end, pulled quickly for an improved Windows.

And I find  the claims about 4e having stronger presence in Internet than in Real Life ironic, coming from "OSR/Old D&D" players, given how every OSR player and their dog has a blog these days. Both sides dug themselves deep trenches and pretend it's all plains from where they are looking.

And don't get me wrong, I dislike 4e, if only because of that absurd money - grubbing split of core classes into 3 books. Want to convert a druid to new edition? Well tough titties, better fork over that cash.

Quote from: Rincewind1;683096I'm finding myself agreeing somewhat with Mistwell...someone check if the stars are right.

He's correct to a point. 4e was successful by RPG standards, just not successful by Hasbro/WotC standards. It's like saying that Windows Vista didn't sell because it was pulled so quickly - but of course it sold like hot cakes, it's Windows after all, the biggest guy on the OS market, except it did not sell as well, was flawed, and caused enough bad marketing, that it was in the end, pulled quickly for an improved Windows.

Yeah well I just found myself agreeing with Pundit too, so there might be something to your thought about the stars being weirdly aligned.

Quote from: Rincewind1;683096And I find  the claims about 4e having stronger presence in Internet than in Real Life ironic, coming from "OSR/Old D&D" players, given how every OSR player and their dog has a blog these days. Both sides dug themselves deep trenches and pretend it's all plains from where they are looking.

Yep. Popularity is a weak front for OSR fans to fight on. What's the highest selling OSR product? 5,000 copies?

Quote from: Rincewind1;683096And don't get me wrong, I dislike 4e, if only because of that absurd money - grubbing split of core classes into 3 books. Want to convert a druid to new edition? Well tough titties, better fork over that cash.

Actually, I like the idea of splitting classes over multiple books. It means the players aren't all trying to share one book at the table, and if you want to just read up on your chosen class, you can buy a cheaper book and just use that one.

Quote from: Haffrung;683106Actually, I like the idea of splitting classes over multiple books. It means the players aren't all trying to share one book at the table, and if you want to just read up on your chosen class, you can buy a cheaper book and just use that one.

Well, for me the greatest sin was that some of old core classes were put into different books, rather than release the "usuals" in the main PHB.

Quote from: Rincewind1;683110Well, for me the greatest sin was that some of old core classes were put into different books, rather than release the "usuals" in the main PHB.

But they did do that for Essentials - they split up the classes into the four core (fighter, cleric, rogue, wizard), and then four secondary (druid, paladin, ranger, warlock).

I have a feeling Essentials offers some clues to how WotC intends to present Next. The goals are the same - make the game more accessible to new or casual gamers.