|
5 years ago ::
Aug 17, 2008 - 8:37PM
#51
|
|
|
To really understand the game and fully decide whether you DO like it or not, you really do have to play it. That's the only way to have a solid opinion. Reading the rules is NOT enough.
Reading the rules IS enough to have an impression on whether or not you MIGHT like it. But then, you don't truly like or dislike it yet, you're just sure enough for yourself that you will or won't. But, it's an understandable opinion either way by that point.
Reading less than half the rules ONCE...doesn't even qualify one to have an opinion worth a rat's crap in the first place. Such people's views are completely disregarded by me outright and often end up getting into my ignore list.
And finally...
You can lead a horse to water...and if it won't drink, kill it and get a smarter horse.
No, if you read what I posted, I hate 4e and I haven't even read it. I know I hate it for the reasons mentioned in that post.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Aug 17, 2008 - 9:42PM
#52
|
|
|
*and I'm the kind of guy who generally likes mmorpgs... weird huh?
Actually, no, it's not. It actually explains so much, as I've said before.
People sleep peacefully in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. --George Orwell There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people. --Howard Zinn He who fights with monsters must take care lest he thereby become a monster. --Friedrich Nietzsche 
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Aug 17, 2008 - 9:44PM
#53
|
Date Joined:
Aug 15, 2007
|
You could decide not to rent a movie after reading the DVD case, or decide not to buy a book after reading the back cover, but you certainly wouldn't start saying you didn't like the movie, or the book, because you'd know that you weren't informed enough to make a judgement like that.
However, if you don't like horror movies, you shouldn't have to continually face people that say, "watch the horror before you decide you don't like it!" You shouldn't really expect force them to pay for and sit through it just so you can confirm that you really don't like horror movies.
Note: Horror movies aren't pen and paper RPGs!
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Aug 17, 2008 - 9:52PM
#54
|
Date Joined:
Feb 21, 2007
|
My feelings on 4E are mixed. On the plus side, the math and mechanics behind how things work are great. I can see a clear progression from my first level character and the system seems to be workable all the way up to 30th lvl. The character races also seem to be very balanced. Half-elves have become a viable race again.  Also random character death at low levels seems to be much less of a problem.
The negatives are big though. I feel that the classes are very "cookie cutter" and don't leave much room for character development. In many ways I feel more like I am playing D&D mini's or Warhammer than traditional D&D. There are many times that I feel like I am playing a board game like descent instead of an RPG. The magical items also seem to be less than inspiring. There doesn't seem to be any sense of wonder or excitement in them. They really seem like magictech. Also, the rituals seem too be too expensive and produce very weak results. Our wizard bought an alarm ritual and used it. Because he did not have perception as a class skill we ended up getting ambushed. Everyone in the party, including the wizard, felt we wasted 25gp on a weak ritual that did not help the party at all. 
see i am always amazed by the cookie cutter bit.
look at any non pure caster in earlier versions ..they were more cookie cutter.
and while the pure casters had more choices in theroy they were usually the same "more so in core then latter"
think on almost every low level wizards 1st level spells were.
and once in combat it went cast spell maybe 2 then pull out crossbow.
this is far more cookie cutter then 4th.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Aug 17, 2008 - 9:58PM
#55
|
Date Joined:
Feb 21, 2007
|
[s]RTFM? nvm, its late. ID 10-T moment there.
1st AD&D plays better than it reads, but still its verbose college book format reads better than 4th.... 
I think it even included a glossary and index. Granted the index was about as useful as 4th's.....
1st reads horribly 2nd also but both were fun.
i find 4th better and thought it read fine though i have friends who did no tlike it from read but after conversation they came around.
and i have one friend who hated how 4th read but likes it now that he has played.
everybody processes differently.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Aug 17, 2008 - 9:59PM
#56
|
Date Joined:
Feb 21, 2007
|
No, if you read what I posted, I hate 4e and I haven't even read it. I know I hate it for the reasons mentioned in that post.
you do not play d&d so your input is less then useful.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Aug 17, 2008 - 10:10PM
#57
|
Date Joined:
Sep 11, 2005
|
No, sorry you are wrong. Everyone else think I must play the game for a few months or so before I can claim I don't like 4th edition. So did you bump your head, or have they not brainwashed you yet? 
It is refreshing to see someone who enjoys 4th that can accept reading the rules as viable to tell whether you like the game or not. 
SEE!!!!!! look right above this post for one of them now! Look out they will try to brainwash you next!
You say it's "brainwashing", when it's merely our experience.
I was very skeptical about 4e before it came out, for all of the reasons that everyone knows about. Then I got the books, read them, and was increasingly skeptical. It looked horribly boring.
Then I actually gave the game a go - with an open mind, of course, I'm not the kind of person that likes to close my mind to things unnecessarily - and it was, surprisingly, a lot of fun. Then I played it a little more, read the books again, actually understood the reasoning behind a lot of the rules, and now I like 4e very much.
I also liked and still like 3e, but I prefer 4e by a fair bit, especially because of how easy it is to DM 4e; the reduction in prep time is huge.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Aug 17, 2008 - 10:41PM
#58
|
Date Joined:
Jul 11, 2008
|
On the downside, a lot of older gamers don't like it because it took away a lot of the noncombat options in the game and made them into either virtually unsuable rituals or just removed them altogether.
It seems to have gone without notice, but I wanted to correct this: I've seen just as many older gamers who enjoy 4e, and newer gamers who dislike it. The main source of argument I've seen is when folks on either side assume everyone with the same D&D experience as them feel the same way about things.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Aug 17, 2008 - 10:47PM
#59
|
|
|
you do not play d&d so your input is less then useful.
It's still input from a customer. (I bought all 3 core 3.5 books, Unearthed Arcana, and Psi HB from 3.0)
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Aug 18, 2008 - 12:16AM
#60
|
|
|
Well my group thinks 4.0 makes me less frustrated as a DM so they LOVE IT! coz they get to play more. :D
|
|
|
