Just a thought on the "new edition" vs. "more of the same" debate, I'd say that the main thing causing me to view Essentials as new editionish is the changes to the power structure of the martial characters. Despite the fact that they appear to be completely compatible with the original printed PHB (which is the only original 4e book I own), I'd at least go so far as to say Essentials includes new editions of the martial classes. Other than that, I have no dog in this hunt because I don't really care what anyone calls the various books/versions.

Quote from: Angry_Douchebag;412658At least you can tell from the post that the author has a functional understanding of the product he's reviewing; we've never seen anything of the sort from Settembrini.  his only purpose is to deride people and attempt to sound informed by using made up terminology whose meaning is only known to him.

There's people whose MO is this.

I've known people who automatically "review" a book as being crap, without ever reading the book at all.

In practice there isn't much anybody can do about this, short of either ignoring the person in question or outright murdering them in person.

Quote from: Bobloblah;412656Considering I was responding to you, I am of course referring to the conversation you and I were actually having during our little back and forth...

Yeah, the one about whether or not Essentials is a 4e product.

Quote from: Bobloblah;412656Again, it seems that there are a lot of people out there who disagree with you...

And there are just as many who agree with me. If your basis for deciding the veracity of a statement is whether or not you can find someone to disagree with it, er, that seems...interesting.

Of course, that isn't the basis you use. So why do you keep bringing it up? Either you know something I don't - and I'm actually playing 4e and an Essentials character - or you're just pointing to things others have said because you want to discredit the idea but don't have any knowledge or experience with which to do so...

Quote from: Bobloblah;412656As for the Vista comment, are you referring to Vista vs Win7?

I'm referring to Window's marketing campaign where they told folks to rate a new OS they were developing. When the folks gave it high marks, they said, "Surprise! There isn't a new OS - this is Vista. See, you only think you don't like it."

Seanchai

Quote from: Bobloblah;412656Again, it seems that there are a lot of people out there who disagree with you, and I'm not sure why I should believe you, instead.  As for the Vista comment, are you referring to Vista vs Win7? Win7 is obviously built on top of the Vista infrastructure, but there are plenty of changes to go around.

As the resident 'Linux or Death' junkie, I would like to further add that Vista = complete shit, while Win7 is the motherfucking bomb.  Kudos to the guys in Redmond, they did actually make a useful operating system from the pile of rotting shit that was Vista.

How any particular reader applies that to 4e vs Essentials is entirely up to them.  

Quote from: Imperator;412603Pseudoephedrine (I think it was him) told many times that his first 4e games were almost TPKs.

Mirrors my experience as well.  We lost a ton of PCs in the first 5-10 sessions in our playtest of 4e back in '08, and that's with encounters balanced BtB.

Quote from: Reckall;412631Cite?

Lehman went down due to it's overexposure to the subprime market. I.e. mismanagement & idiocy, not criminal activity.

Maybe he was thinking of Enron or something?
I didn't really grasp the intricacies of what went on with Lehman bros. that led to our current economic collapse, but I don't seem to recall anyone saying they lied.

WoTC, on the other hand, most definitely did lie.


So, yes, I guess I'm saying they're worse than Lehman Brothers.

RPGPundit