I hate game balance!

[rowport]

This is still the case.

That's... about all the refutation your post requires.

But I can go beyond that. You seem to view the above quote as an example of a system which hasn't got balance. Actually, its an example of a system which DOES have balance. Each character has areas in which they excel, and areas in which they fall behind. Fortunately, its even the method of balance chosen by 4th edition! How convenient for you! Now you can embrace the game and be happy, instead of repeating lines from The Incredibles which, in the movie, made even less sense than your use of them did.

LOL Pretty funny. Not only did Cadfan beat my post, but even used the "excel" wording.

 

[rowport]

Did you ever consider actually playing the game?

GET BACK TO WORK, BUZZ! YOUR FIENDISH-PACT MASTER HAS SPOKEN!

 

[buzz]

GET BACK TO WORK, BUZZ! YOUR FIENDISH-PACT MASTER HAS SPOKEN!

I'll fiendish your pact-master, pal.

 

[Ethalias]

*SNIP*
In 4E, however, the paradigm is quite different. It's a pure gamist game, the simulationism almost completely banished. So I can see how balance is necessary.
*SNIP*

I agree with you here, except..

I haven't read SNG (is that it?) theory, but I'd say though it's predominantly Gamist, it sits quite well with a Narrativist approach, though perhaps that's not particularly relevant/pertinent here. Am I right?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

This is still the case.

Don't have my PHB with me, but isn't the maximum range on a longbow 40 squares, i.e. 200feet, i.e. a little less than 70 yards? So y'know, maybe it's not all still the case

Or maybe I'm forgetting a rule that lets you fire further than that.

Btw I see your point I'm just being difficult

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

Its called "willful exaggeration."

Not too much, though. The barrier to entry is pretty low, and once you're in, you're in. Humans and Eladrin can do it from first level. One or two feats when you get one every other level isn't much of a sacrifice, especially given that feats aren't the nice cookie they were in 3.x.

(Hmmm...is the plural of 'Eladrin' 'Eladrin' or 'Eladrins'?)

 

[RabidBob]

I HATE GAME BALANCE!

I'm not convinced you do actually!

I have always abhorred game balance. It made no sense. I loved the fact a fighter could kick the snot out of a mage at melee, and a mage could destroy a fighter with a spell, and a ranger could kill both of them from 100 yards away.

Actually I think it goes more like: if wizard has right spells he ranger and fighter, end of game.

Rangers dont track anymore,

No tracking rules sucks. I expect DMs will tie this in with "Nature". Shrinking the skill set was a sensible move in my opinion, others will disagree (I understand why and agree to a point).

mages cannot phantasmal killer anything anymore,

Eh, that's not a bad thing.

and bards, well, bards ARENT anymore

They will be again, but their omission has not done WoTC any favours.

Its that DIFFERENCE in things that make it great.

Abso-bloody-lutely!

Something about how all the classes feel so damn similar to me... it irks me. Everyone is special. Everyone can kick ass.

The issue is, in my opinion, that the game shouldn't be boring for the fighter at level 18 nor should it be boring for the mage at level 18. Yes, everyone can kick arse now in their specialty area. As D&D is a game and we play for fun I just don't see this as a problem. If you do, that's cool, I expect you'll enjoy another edition or game more than 4E.

I now invite the 4E lovers here to tell me that my opinion is wrong. Show me why game balance is necessary, because, as you know better than I do, my opinion is not correct!

Hmmm. Being an opinion it's neither inherently correct or not correct. Or it's inherently correct along with everyone elses. Or something.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I agree with you here, except..

I haven't read SNG (is that it?) theory, but I'd say though it's predominantly Gamist, it sits quite well with a Narrativist approach, though perhaps that's not particularly relevant/pertinent here. Am I right?

I don't think 4E includes anything I'd call narrativist. Whilst the DM is encouraged to work with the players on "what they want to see" repeatedly in the DMG, this is basically just an encouragement. The players, as far as I can tell, don't have any rules-based tools for controlling or influencing the story whatsoever, which is atypical of games concerned with narrativism. I think people used to games with a more strongly narrativist approach might be disappointed if they expected much of that from D&D.

 

[buzz]

Am I right?

Not really, but no sweat.

 

[Remathilis]

Here here!

I love being the rogue and being overshadowed by the mage from level 5 on. Climb Walls? Nah, I can just fly up there. Oh, you need that lock opened? Knock. Going to scout on the ogres? I'll cast invisibility and silence to join you. Oh, archaic language? Comprehend Language here we come! All that, and I can STILL do more damage in one fireball than you can with a backstab without the needless hassle of flanking or getting surprise.

And oh, the fun we had when fighters had no skills beyond climb and jump. But he was the MASTER of melee combat, until the cleric cast divine power, righteous might, and greater magic weapon to dominate the foe. Then he'd heal himself and the fighter (who provided a wonderful distraction until the cleric was buffed) and it was off for our 8 hour nap (because the cleric was out of spells from buffing and the wizard blew his on being a rogue exploration and attack magic)

And how about that love for half-orcs? Or half-elves? Or bards? Or monks with flurry of misses? and didn't we LOVE the fact humans before 3e had the best racial trait ever: they could be 20th level paladins! Can elves be either 20th OR paladins? NO! But humans, they could be BOTH!

I guess that wasn't fair. My half-elf bard had a use too. He had max ranks in diplomacy, synergy bonuses, racial bonuses, feat bonuses, and other stacking +'s. So he did ALL the negotiating with NPCs while the rest of the players zoned out because they had 8-10 charisma's. My mighty +18 to diplomacy at 2nd level (+5 ranks, +3 cha, +2 half-elf, +2 negotiator, +6 synergy from bluff, know: nobility, and sense motive) made putting any ranks in it for anyone else pointless. (oh, he also had charm person in case he DID roll poorly...)

So viva la broken! Long live the CoDzilla! Bow to the majesty all of the all-encompassing Swiss-army wizard! Huzzah for cherry picking and bonus stacking! D&D wouldn't be D&D without them.

(Sorry, that much sarcasm made me throw up in my mouth a little)