| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| The Red Walker |
Posted - 23 Sep 2008 : 14:36:10
My good friend Chosen of Moradin made a great point. He would like to see just one scroll where people can discuss 4e Forgotten Realms, the new rules and how things have changed without any negativity.
Seems like a good time to try, I know we all don't like everything about the new realms, but it is my intent to encourage a discussion of just the things you see positively. I think we need a scroll like this were scribes, especially newer ones , can discuss the new realms freely and openly without being "called out", told they are wrong for liking it or even worse.
So lets give it a go!! |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Pandora |
Posted - 05 Oct 2008 : 04:44:35
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
quote:
Originally posted by Pandora
How can the players not know their "ED" since its in the rulebooks and they choose it?
Of course the players know it, have you read what she said at all ?
Player know, character don't know.
Sure, players know and characters dont ... So 4e is just for those who DONT metagame? If the player doesnt know its a MUCH bigger surprise (and vastly preferable IMO) when he finds out. Just think of it as a christmas present:
- In your view its good enough if you know what youre getting (since you asked for it), but pretend you dont know.
- I prefer NOT to know and to have folks get things I always wanted anyway.
EDIT:
I really hate it when I let myself be thrown off course like this, because the REAL issue isnt knowing / not knowing what you will be able to do, but only the name. As I already tried to do a few posts above is explain that DESTINY is a bad word for this; "Epic path" or a whole host of other terms would work just as well, although they probably wouldnt sound "as grand". Destiny is something over which you dont have control whereas the player controls everything his character does or is. Its as simple as that and calling such a "career choice" a destiny is like describing our blue skies as green. |
| Chosen of Moradin |
Posted - 01 Oct 2008 : 22:15:29
Exactly. This is the Role play, act in character. I know that my good dwarf want to found and use the Axe of the Dwarven Lords, and I ask this to the DM at the creation of my character. But the when, the why, and the how, are in the hands of the DM. This is where the fun, the magic, and the phantasy lives... it is a shared game. I want somethings to my character, and the DM have a story to tell, about a group of characters. The sharing that comes from this is something superb, IMO, and is what bind me to this game.
About the use of the term "Destiny", well, I donīt have any problem with it. In all the heroic myths, the heroic legends, the concept of the "hero" is tied to a destiny. To the Greeks (Pandoraīs box?), the hero stands between the normal men and the gods, and all have a destiny, in the end. Why not in a game? And why see a problem in this, if this term is commom between heroes? Because of a banalization of the use |
| Skeptic |
Posted - 01 Oct 2008 : 18:17:28
quote:
Originally posted by Pandora
How can the players not know their "ED" since its in the rulebooks and they choose it?
Of course the players know it, have you read what she said at all ?
Player know, character don't know.
|
| Pandora |
Posted - 01 Oct 2008 : 17:28:00
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
I still think you don't need to regard an ED as something predetermined, in spite of the name. You certainly don't need to have PCs know about their "destiny" in advance, even if the players know what direction they want their characters to go in.
That's it !
ED are the coolest player's priorities mechanism in D&D 4E.
Again: I am NOT arguing about the mechanics, you can keep their coolness or get even more. Why does it have to be called a destiny if that term is misused from its definition to make it sound bigger than it is? Its just the same as having delusions of grandeur and thinking yourself bigger than they are. How can the players not know their "ED" since its in the rulebooks and they choose it? Its not the DM who hands out these as a reward, is it? |
| Skeptic |
Posted - 01 Oct 2008 : 17:12:53
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
I still think you don't need to regard an ED as something predetermined, in spite of the name. You certainly don't need to have PCs know about their "destiny" in advance, even if the players know what direction they want their characters to go in.
That's it !
ED are the coolest player's priorities mechanism in D&D 4E. |
| Chosen of Moradin |
Posted - 01 Oct 2008 : 15:29:55
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
quote:
Originally posted by Christopher_Rowe
Not at all! And I'd add, goal-oriented, group-oriented play. (Which is not to say that 3.0/3.5 did not--I have no idea, as I never played it--but the new rules certainly foster, and even demand, more cooperation than the AD&D and 2E rules did.)
Yeah, that is also a good point.
Character creation is what it should be in D&D :
1- Get a concept (vague).
2- Create a efficient "build" around it.
3- Add required fluff for it to make sense.
It's so sad the DMG wastes all that good stuff in the PHB.
Good point, Skeptic. The creation of a character now is more easy to be handled, no matter how expert someone is in rpgs. And the modularity of the game make it more easy to be understand for someone that never played, or that have some problems with the old rules.
In other words, quoting my wife, when we first create her character, in the 3.x Edition:
quote:
Originally talked by the overgoddess 
What [Censored] wizard I will be, if I stay without my powers, that are what define me, so easily?
Now, with the constant powers of all the classes in the new edition, she is much more interested in the game than she was before.  |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 01 Oct 2008 : 15:29:39
quote:
Originally posted by Pandora
Destiny refers to a predetermined course of events.
The class options have nothing to do with events whatsoever, they only have to do with skills the character gets. Thus its a particularly bad name for it if you take the true meaning and it is probably only used because it sounds "grand" and "important". "Epic powers" or something similar would have described it just as well, except that it doesnt sound big as I-am-a-(super)hero-with-a-destiny-and-am-importantish.
Heh.
I still think you don't need to regard an ED as something predetermined, in spite of the name. You certainly don't need to have PCs know about their "destiny" in advance, even if the players know what direction they want their characters to go in. |
| Pandora |
Posted - 01 Oct 2008 : 07:47:51
quote:
Originally posted by Sanishiverquote:
Originally posted by Pandora
2b. 4e: Since chosen is a class just like any others it shouldnt be imbalancing.
Not semantics. An epic desitny is more than just another class; it's a destiny.
You don't think the concept has any special meaning? I think it does.
Well you choose one destiny from those available, right? But if you look at what makes up a destiny is the fact that the person having that destiny does not make the decision, but the fact that its thrust upon him by outside forces. Its not like the "Superhero" says in his childhood: Oh my destiny will be to save the world from the comet which no one knows about yet, but who is racing on a collision course with this planet. The comet is there regardless of the Superhero and he just has to decide if he does something about it. An excerpt (the first sentence) from the Wikipedia page on destiny:
Destiny refers to a predetermined course of events.
The class options have nothing to do with events whatsoever, they only have to do with skills the character gets. Thus its a particularly bad name for it if you take the true meaning and it is probably only used because it sounds "grand" and "important". "Epic powers" or something similar would have described it just as well, except that it doesnt sound big as I-am-a-(super)hero-with-a-destiny-and-am-importantish.
quote:
Originally posted by Sanishiver
Keeping it postive.  quote:
Originally posted by Pandora
2a. 3e: Having a chosen in a group seriously imbalances that due to the power boost for the character.
If you re-read the 4E Player's Handbook and the FR Epic Destiny information, I believe you'll see there's no power imbalance.
You're right that becoming a Chosen could seriuosly unbalance play, but that was in previous editions of the game.
IMO things have improved.
IMO things have gotten worse, because they reduce really extraordinary word(s) that have a "big meaning" like "destiny" or "being chosen [by a god]" to something you take from the shelves of your Powers-R-us mart yourself. The only point about chosen and destiny is that you DONT have control over it yourself (except for not being able to choose not to fulfill your destiny and die with the rest of us).
All this does is make our lives - as roleplayers - a little cheaper because these words will loose part of their meaning. If the "need" to use grander words and names every new expansion continues where will we - as players - be in 10-20 years? Will you get your super-duper-abnormal powers at level 5 then or anything similarly ridiculous? I hope not. So explain to me why this useage of "grander names" for the same content is better please.
People in the real world are more or less meaningless nowadays, ants in the giant colony of worker ants that make up our workforce, in other words: nothing special. So a the current trend is to make everything sound more important. But if everything sounds more important and nothing takes a step back and simply calls itself what it is we are back where we started from because everything has the same level of "importantness" again, right? The whole thing is a problem of advertising, where several companies are falling over each other to create bigger words to describe their products. This leads to our lives becoming "cheaper" because words and things are made meaningless. The real catch is that WotC and D&D have a sort of monopoly here and that they dont need to use bigger words, but they still do (because the idea of the new edition has to be sold to their - 99,9% most likely non-gaming - managers from Hasbro??).
A problem like this exists in cooking as well: There are tons of words to describe "more mass" in a meal extra long spicy XXX, double, XXL, King size ... but how many words do you know - which are actively used - to describe a "better quality"? There are none, because that isnt the point of quality. Quality exists to "be as it is" and to be recognized as such by the consumers and not to sound bigger / worth more than it is. Sadly 4e fails on the quality aspect for me and that aspect has been more important than quantity for me. It is probably different for other people, but a day only has 24 hours and wasting it with quantity always seems a bad option.
P.S.: I havent handled any of the 4e core books for more than 5 minutes since that was enough to make up my mind about the quality of the game and the books themselves, so I cant "re-read" any information there. You might have noticed that I am arguing not about the skills and powers you get for the "destinies", but rather about using that term in this content. |
| Christopher_Rowe |
Posted - 30 Sep 2008 : 21:49:53
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
quote:
Originally posted by Christopher_Rowe
How do you mean, Skeptic?
I was expecting some reaction to my answer .
Oh, no, you explained it pretty well. I gotta be honest, I respect the heck out of how deeply theory guys like you and Pandora think about the whys and wherefores of gaming style and methodology, but that stuff actually kind of makes my eyes glaze over. I think you'd probably think our gaming sessions with the puppets and wacky accents and props are pretty goofy!
I would have responded, but I didn't see a little smiley guy that's got his hand on his chin nodding and thoughtfully pursing his lips, going "hmmmmm...I see."
 |
| Skeptic |
Posted - 30 Sep 2008 : 20:48:18
quote:
Originally posted by Christopher_Rowe
How do you mean, Skeptic?
I was expecting some reaction to my answer . |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 28 Sep 2008 : 23:35:23
quote:
Originally posted by Christopher_Rowe
Not at all! And I'd add, goal-oriented, group-oriented play. (Which is not to say that 3.0/3.5 did not--I have no idea, as I never played it--but the new rules certainly foster, and even demand, more cooperation than the AD&D and 2E rules did.)
As a player in a game that's using 3.5E rules, I'd say that goal-oriented and group-oriented play is there, but with 4E it's definitely more built into the mechanics of the game. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 28 Sep 2008 : 23:31:31
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
I really like that Auril now has dominion of winds and storms! Always thought she was under-utilized. It's also cool that she along with Malar and Umberlee make up the three furies and owe their allegiance to Sylvanus.
I agree that Auril was under-utilized.
As for her being a "fury"--well, she's always been one of the Gods of Fury. The only real difference is that Talos is out of the picture, and now the gods of Fury are now tied more closely with Silvanus, which seems appropriate (he is after all the god of nature, and neutral). |
| Dalor Darden |
Posted - 28 Sep 2008 : 22:30:55
quote:
Originally posted by Pandora
quote:
Originally posted by Dalor Darden
They make it easy for kids to play because they have cards to use that helps them remember what they can do. Having everything on one sheet helps adults, but children often have a hard time focusing on one section of a character sheet and remembering even where to find things.
Is it wise to have "kids" play this game? There are is a reason why I think that people should not start this too early and I hope you understand my reasoning behind it:
To have fun in a creative game like D&D you need a basic amount of "reference material" from real life. This more or less adds up to learning as much as you can in school and your daily life as you can and the more you have seen the more you can use as a basis for further creativity. Lets see it like this: If you have trained at an art school and know the techniques that exist you will be better able to actually create something good you have been tasked to do than an 8 year old kid who hasnt seen much or tried much.
To gather this "basic knowledge" you need real life, because a virtual world is never going to give you the same experiences. Thus any time spent with D&D (OR computer games!) is actually time taken from that "experience real life and learn more" job which all of the kids have.
This might seem off topic, but for me it isnt because 4e has its rules and the look adapted for even younger kids and IMO that is a dangerous trend. Our children are sitting in front of the computer at too young ages instead of being out there and playing with others. Now D&D is doing the same just for a "quick buck".
I think that children playing a table-top role-playing game is very good for kids...especially if they get to interact with other kids; or like my son and I, because it gives us time together. It also encourages reading skills, problem solving (not the reflexive and repetitive sort of video games) and growth of imagination.
When I was in Middle-School I had several teachers that thought D&D was good for us. One even used it to teach us character acting.
The FR is a wonderful place to get a good imagination going, and children need their imagination more than they need "life coping" skills. By gaining a flexible mind they will be better able to cope with life than if they have simply learned what to say and do. Better to sneak in life experiences early on through their imagination than allow them to go until they are "adults" and get smacked with some serious stuff that they have no clue how to handle.
Role-playing will give me doors of opportunity with my children that simply playing catch or tossing a football never will...even though I like those too. |
| Skeptic |
Posted - 28 Sep 2008 : 20:18:01
quote:
Originally posted by Christopher_Rowe
How do you mean, Skeptic?
The whole "remove much of the decision power from your players and replace it with your own idea of fun" fluff text.
i.e. any place where DMG says that the DM could override what should happen by the rules with what he thinks may be more "fun".
"fun" is a emergent thing, not something to be forced upon players.
|
| Christopher_Rowe |
Posted - 28 Sep 2008 : 19:26:43
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
It's so sad the DMG wastes all that good stuff in the PHB.
How do you mean, Skeptic?
The interesting thing to me about the 4E DMG, especially compared to the last one I owned (which had a cover featuring a gigantic efreet dangling a mostly naked blonde above a fighter and a wizard, and some truly, erm, fascinating "organizational" methodology) is that this one has very little rules stuff by comparison. Instead, the bulk of the book is given over to "look, this how you actually do this" type advice.
|
| Skeptic |
Posted - 28 Sep 2008 : 19:10:14
quote:
Originally posted by Christopher_Rowe
Not at all! And I'd add, goal-oriented, group-oriented play. (Which is not to say that 3.0/3.5 did not--I have no idea, as I never played it--but the new rules certainly foster, and even demand, more cooperation than the AD&D and 2E rules did.)
Yeah, that is also a good point.
Character creation is what it should be in D&D :
1- Get a concept (vague).
2- Create a efficient "build" around it.
3- Add required fluff for it to make sense.
It's so sad the DMG wastes all that good stuff in the PHB. |
| Christopher_Rowe |
Posted - 28 Sep 2008 : 15:24:15
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
quote:
Originally posted by Sanishiver
I like that the game fosters goal-oriented play and rewards it.
Oh, I'm not alone
Not at all! And I'd add, goal-oriented, group-oriented play. (Which is not to say that 3.0/3.5 did not--I have no idea, as I never played it--but the new rules certainly foster, and even demand, more cooperation than the AD&D and 2E rules did.) |
| Skeptic |
Posted - 28 Sep 2008 : 15:19:58
quote:
Originally posted by Sanishiver
I like that the game fosters goal-oriented play and rewards it.
Oh, I'm not alone |
| The Red Walker |
Posted - 28 Sep 2008 : 13:44:29
I really like that Auril now has dominion of winds and storms! Always thought she was under-utilized. It's also cool that she along with Malar and Umberlee make up the three furies and owe their allegiance to Sylvanus. |
| Nerfed2Hell |
Posted - 28 Sep 2008 : 01:02:37
To be fair, it is hard to find stuff to like about it.
I tried. It wasn't easy. |
| The Red Walker |
Posted - 27 Sep 2008 : 15:30:28
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
quote:
Originally posted by Chosen of Moradin
Ashe, read carefully... this scroll is not about positive critics, or about "talking about how great 4E Realms is"... is only, and only, to talk about the positive things in the 4E Realms. This is clear, and simple, and is stated in the very first post.
About to be civil, Dr. Gregory House is very civil, too (well, sometimes. . But he is a kick in the lower parts, no matter how civil he is. And civility have to make sense, too. If I demand to eat watermelons, I want to eat watermelons, and not bananas, donīt matter how "civil" the bananas are offered to me.
I understand the point of everyone, but for rants about the 4E, we have a lot of scrolls. As Walker pointed in the beggining of this scroll, this one is intended to serve only watermelons, I mean,
quote:
...to encourage a discussion of just the things you see positively. I think we need a scroll like this were scribes, especially newer ones , can discuss the new realms freely and openly without being "called out", told they are wrong for liking it or even worse.
Iīm not a new one, but I really want to eat some watermelons.
My apologies, it does indeed state that.
For what it is worth, I did want to include more in the title of the scroll, but they only allow so many characters!
And just to clarify for everyone, the intent isn't so much to hava a rah rah!! 4E FR is great scroll, just a place for what people like about it. I encourage a good discussion here, but would like to avoid vomit comparisons and the like if we can |
| Sanishiver |
Posted - 27 Sep 2008 : 11:05:49
Keeping it postive. quote:
Originally posted by Pandora
2a. 3e: Having a chosen in a group seriously imbalances that due to the power boost for the character.
If you re-read the 4E Player's Handbook and the FR Epic Destiny information, I believe you'll see there's no power imbalance.
You're right that becoming a Chosen could seriuosly unbalance play, but that was in previous editions of the game.
IMO things have improved.
quote:
Originally posted by Pandora
2b. 4e: Since chosen is a class just like any others it shouldnt be imbalancing.
Not semantics. An epic desitny is more than just another class; it's a destiny.
You don't think the concept has any special meaning? I think it does.
And that's what I like about it. You can build your character for twenty levels of play, always striving for that goal, then if you survive you can obtain it.
I like that the game fosters goal-oriented play and rewards it. |
| Chosen of Moradin |
Posted - 26 Sep 2008 : 16:05:30
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
quote:
Originally posted by Chosen of Moradin
Ashe, read carefully... this scroll is not about positive critics, or about "talking about how great 4E Realms is"... is only, and only, to talk about the positive things in the 4E Realms. This is clear, and simple, and is stated in the very first post.
About to be civil, Dr. Gregory House is very civil, too (well, sometimes.. But he is a kick in the lower parts, no matter how civil he is. And civility have to make sense, too. If I demand to eat watermelons, I want to eat watermelons, and not bananas, donīt matter how "civil" the bananas are offered to me.
I understand the point of everyone, but for rants about the 4E, we have a lot of scrolls. As Walker pointed in the beggining of this scroll, this one is intended to serve only watermelons, I mean,
quote:
...to encourage a discussion of just the things you see positively. I think we need a scroll like this were scribes, especially newer ones , can discuss the new realms freely and openly without being "called out", told they are wrong for liking it or even worse.
Iīm not a new one, but I really want to eat some watermelons.
My apologies, it does indeed state that.
Youīre welcome. |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 26 Sep 2008 : 15:55:20
quote:
Originally posted by Chosen of Moradin
Ashe, read carefully... this scroll is not about positive critics, or about "talking about how great 4E Realms is"... is only, and only, to talk about the positive things in the 4E Realms. This is clear, and simple, and is stated in the very first post.
About to be civil, Dr. Gregory House is very civil, too (well, sometimes.. But he is a kick in the lower parts, no matter how civil he is. And civility have to make sense, too. If I demand to eat watermelons, I want to eat watermelons, and not bananas, donīt matter how "civil" the bananas are offered to me.
I understand the point of everyone, but for rants about the 4E, we have a lot of scrolls. As Walker pointed in the beggining of this scroll, this one is intended to serve only watermelons, I mean,
quote:
...to encourage a discussion of just the things you see positively. I think we need a scroll like this were scribes, especially newer ones , can discuss the new realms freely and openly without being "called out", told they are wrong for liking it or even worse.
Iīm not a new one, but I really want to eat some watermelons.
My apologies, it does indeed state that. |
| synboy |
Posted - 26 Sep 2008 : 15:48:15
I'm thinking that the percieved problem with the designers wasn't the existance of the Chosen, but it was existance of Chosen that weren't the PC's.
The way that I read the complaint, the "Chosen" of other deities were job positions that were already filled, thus blocking the ability of the characters in assuming those positions. It's sort of like saying
"Hey, I want to become president of the US!"
"Sorry, we've already got one!"
It should have been (and should continue to be) made clear that the Chosen are, for lack of a better term, NPC's. You can become one, but that's pretty much it for that character. You should be so busy doing stuff (mostly non-adventuring) that you wouldn't have time to do anything that would be fun to play. Sort of like the genie in (Disney) Aladdin.
Enormous Cosmic Power!!!
Teeny Weenie Living Space.
I don't agree, but I can understand the argument.
I think the primary problem was the introduction of Chosen outside of the "original" Chosen of Mystra. Originally, there were no other Chosen. They were specific to Mystra
Not only that, but Chosen were supposedly a problem that had to be removed... The new books haven't had time to even collect dust, and yet the supposed problem is now back.
[/quote] |
| Chosen of Moradin |
Posted - 26 Sep 2008 : 15:33:50
Ashe, read carefully... this scroll is not about positive critics, or about "talking about how great 4E Realms is"... is only, and only, to talk about the positive things in the 4E Realms. This is clear, and simple, and is stated in the very first post.
About to be civil, Dr. Gregory House is very civil, too (well, sometimes.. But he is a kick in the lower parts, no matter how civil he is. And civility have to make sense, too. If I demand to eat watermelons, I want to eat watermelons, and not bananas, donīt matter how "civil" the bananas are offered to me.
I understand the point of everyone, but for rants about the 4E, we have a lot of scrolls. As Walker pointed in the beggining of this scroll, this one is intended to serve only watermelons, I mean,
quote:
...to encourage a discussion of just the things you see positively. I think we need a scroll like this were scribes, especially newer ones , can discuss the new realms freely and openly without being "called out", told they are wrong for liking it or even worse.
Iīm not a new one, but I really want to eat some watermelons. |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 26 Sep 2008 : 14:10:46
Red, I'm thinking that maybe you weren't too careful in what you wanted out of this scroll. Yes, there has been some negativity, but overall the tone of the scroll has stayed 'above water', IMO.
I (and I think others) see this scroll as a way is to discuss the changes, whether or not you like them, but to keep the tone civil. So, even though we might have a lot of people here that don't like the changes, they are (or at least trying to) keep the tone without negativity to discuss why they don't like the changes. Likewise, the people the like the changes are keeping a civil tongue and not resulting to grognard-calling.
If, on the other hand, you were looking to create a scroll where people are only talking about how great 4E Realms is, then we definitely missed the mark and you needed to be a bit clearer in the introduction of the scroll. |
| The Red Walker |
Posted - 26 Sep 2008 : 14:01:32
quote:
Originally posted by Pandora
Let me get a bucket to be sick in first before telling shining stuff about the glorious $E (the $ is on purpose here) ... if this is really true and not a joke.
I am not trying to single anyone out here, but this is a perfect example of what we do not want on this scroll. There are other examples that could be cited, but for brievities sake I only use this one.
There are many, many other scrolls where opinions like that can be discussed.
This scroll is for a positive discussion of 4e FR rules and changes, please everyone keep it positive for all of us and if you want to argue against it start another scroll or better, utilize one that has already degenerated to that denominator.
** Shakes head and Wonders if there is a ritual that he can cast to make sure everyone reads the first post and follow the spirit of the scroll** |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 26 Sep 2008 : 13:58:06
quote:
Originally posted by Pandora
Is it wise to have "kids" play this game? There are is a reason why I think that people should not start this too early and I hope you understand my reasoning behind it:
To have fun in a creative game like D&D you need a basic amount of "reference material" from real life. This more or less adds up to learning as much as you can in school and your daily life as you can and the more you have seen the more you can use as a basis for further creativity. Lets see it like this: If you have trained at an art school and know the techniques that exist you will be better able to actually create something good you have been tasked to do than an 8 year old kid who hasnt seen much or tried much.
To gather this "basic knowledge" you need real life, because a virtual world is never going to give you the same experiences. Thus any time spent with D&D (OR computer games!) is actually time taken from that "experience real life and learn more" job which all of the kids have.
This might seem off topic, but for me it isnt because 4e has its rules and the look adapted for even younger kids and IMO that is a dangerous trend. Our children are sitting in front of the computer at too young ages instead of being out there and playing with others. Now D&D is doing the same just for a "quick buck".
Even though I don't like 4E and it's dumbing down (reminds me too much 'No Child Left Behind'), I have to disagree with this. No child is too young.
Also, here's some Geeky Goodness.
|
| Nerfed2Hell |
Posted - 26 Sep 2008 : 13:54:09
I don't think kids playing is inherently bad.
I played D&D throughout high school... so, sitting in a basement or a friend's back porch playing --not all that different, it was just lower tech sitting around than what kids have access to today. Many would prefer sitting in front of a TV screen playing Xbox 360 or Wii, or if forced out of the house, many have handheld electronic games to distract them from life experiences. Its just a new age and things are different. Actually, one could argue that playing D&D at an early age is healthy since it will encourage kids to play with other kids (rather than stare at a video game screen) and teach cooperative thinking.
|
|
|
