D&D 4E Should I play 4e?

doctorbadwolf · Jun 6, 2019

ART! said:
Interesting. All I can say is that was not my experience. Maybe my DM at the time wasn't incorporating skills as written, or maybe you or your DM(s) have stressed it? To me it seemed very detached from the way that feats, powers, and spells had this interconnected cascading or domino effect. We used the cards, and I just remember rearranging them frequently based on what feat was going to enable the use of what class power, etc., and that skills rarely seemed to play into that.

I mean that specific aspect of combat, I suppose it could be easy to forget the combat uses of skills, but every single skill had at least situational combat use, even if you didn't take anything to get more out of them.

But yeah, skills affect out of combat challenges more, just like attack powers affect combat more.

HJFudge · Jun 6, 2019

ad_hoc said:
It is against the board rules to insult and provoke others.

Oh don't pull that crap. Don't bust out 'everything you like that isnt this is not as good and shouldn't be run' and then when someone says 'um friend, that doesn't make sense and isnt a good argument' cry harrassment and try to shut down dissenting voices, as if you are being personally attacked.

ad_hoc · Jun 6, 2019

HJFudge said:
Oh don't pull that crap. Don't bust out 'everything you like that isnt this is not as good and shouldn't be run' and then when someone says 'um friend, that doesn't make sense and isnt a good argument' cry harrassment and try to shut down dissenting voices, as if you are being personally attacked.

I didn't say anything about 4e not being good.

The poster also didn't say what you quoted.

The reply translates to: "you know you're an idiot right?"

Joshua Randall · Jun 6, 2019

It's also possible for the argument itself to be terrible (illogical, for example) when the person making the argument is... not terrible.

Greg K · Jun 6, 2019

Joshua Randall said:
It's also possible for the argument itself to be terrible (illogical, for example) when the person making the argument is... not terrible.

Which is how I read the original reply rather than as a personal attack.

Tony Vargas · Jun 6, 2019

HJFudge said:
Oh don't pull that crap. Don't bust out 'everything you like that isnt this is not as good and shouldn't be run' and then when someone says 'um friend, that doesn't make sense and isnt a good argument' cry harrassment and try to shut down dissenting voices, as if you are being personally attacked.

But, then it would just be a /debate/.

Azzy said:
Yeah, a lot of that. I blame that for all of the "the x was like this in previous editions is now something completely different" (eladrin being the first example of the top of my head) and such. I found that far more alienating than anything like warlords or whatever the more popular thing to disparage 4e about.

I was thinking more of the M:tG thing: "we can't trademark Orc, but we can trademark 'Orc Battlejanitor' or 'Dolomitefist Orc' or any other two words we string together in a weird way..."

ART! said:
To me it seemed very detached from the way that feats, powers, and spells had this interconnected cascading or domino effect. We used the cards, and I just remember rearranging them frequently based on what feat was going to enable the use of what class power, etc., and that skills rarely seemed to play into that.

Y'know, I only ever saw one player cut up the 'powercards' sheets that DDI would spit out, and never saw anyone use the published ones. Huh.

And feats enabling the use of a class power? Either I'm not reading that right or I just can't think of an example. There were certainly powers that took a skill as a prerequisite, though.

Immortal Sun · Jun 6, 2019

HJFudge said:
Oh don't pull that crap. Don't bust out 'everything you like that isnt this is not as good and shouldn't be run' and then when someone says 'um friend, that doesn't make sense and isnt a good argument' cry harrassment and try to shut down dissenting voices, as if you are being personally attacked.

Whatever, this forum';s block system enables this kind of behaviour, it's happened with literally everyone (except Celebrim) I've challenged on their ideas here.

After a while enough people will wuss out and put me on ignore that there wont be much sense in being a member of this "community".

ad_hoc · Jun 6, 2019

Joshua Randall said:
It's also possible for the argument itself to be terrible (illogical, for example) when the person making the argument is... not terrible.

There is a difference between:

"I think your argument is terrible"

and

"You know your argument is terrible right?"

The latter is attacking my reasoning skills. The assumption is made that it should be obvious that the argument is terrible and phrasing it as a question is a passive aggressive jab.

As far as what we are actually talking about I don't know why what I am saying is controversial.

Should I play 4e? One thing to consider is whether you are able to form and maintain a group.

Why shouldn't the OP consider that?

ART! · Jun 6, 2019

Tony Vargas said:
Y'know, I only ever saw one player cut up the 'powercards' sheets that DDI would spit out, and never saw anyone use the published ones. Huh.

And feats enabling the use of a class power? Either I'm not reading that right or I just can't think of an example. There were certainly powers that took a skill as a prerequisite, though.

Yeah, I think everybody at our table used the cards. Until you mentioned it I remembered them being professionally produced, but now I recall they were printed on simple copier stock or the like.

Also, I was just pulling an "example" out of my non-precise memory. It's been 5++ years since I played 4E.

Azzy · Jun 7, 2019

Tony Vargas said:
I was thinking more of the M:tG thing: "we can't trademark Orc, but we can trademark 'Orc Battlejanitor' or 'Dolomitefist Orc' or any other two words we string together in a weird way..."

Games Workshop has also been taking lessons from this.