Scratx said:
I went a bit overboard, I admit. I was bashing the immaturity apparent in having such a discussion.
If I ever play 4e, I'll probably have to pretend it's not DnD. I don't have anything against the rules as they are, I just have something against them being DnD. In other words, they would be perfectly fine to me... if they were not being presented as the replacement to DnD 3.5.
I see it as a step forward, and a running spree backwards compared to third edition. Obviously, it's my opinion, so feel free to disregard it if you don't agree with me.
My apologies for any perceived slight.
If I ever play 4e, I'll probably have to pretend it's not DnD. I don't have anything against the rules as they are, I just have something against them being DnD. In other words, they would be perfectly fine to me... if they were not being presented as the replacement to DnD 3.5.
I see it as a step forward, and a running spree backwards compared to third edition. Obviously, it's my opinion, so feel free to disregard it if you don't agree with me.
My apologies for any perceived slight.
For what it's worth, I was mostly trying to mock that debate also...and make no mistake, it was a debate. It went on for not just pages, but many, many pages across several different forums. I posted the end of it here simply to preempt people debating about it here, too.
And I agree, 3.5 is the better game. I don't care much for 4E either.