Search results

Actually, I would say that 4E does small trivial combat far better than 3.5E can ever have hoped to attained. I don't think even LFR runs combat encounters like how you are supposed to but if you actual follow their guidelines you will get exactly what you claim is missing.

Well it doesn't help that Monte Cook actually admitted that some of the design attributes of 3E made a huge mess out of the game. Ooo god no. If there is one thing that I have learned about any Pen and Paper RPG is that if you start borrowing from real life you are more often than going to get...

The 4E version of the Deck of Many things is pretty much the same thing as the AD&D Deck of Many things.

How does this work when most of the 4th edition splat material liberally takes from 2nd edition?

Because the rules aren't a disjointed mess that you have spend hours looking at to figure out their intent which how other editions were designed. Face it when the creator of everyone's favorite edition uses the word Ivory Tower to describe how they built the game you have accessibility...

Just out of curiosity are you familiar with Eberron?

I've always wondered why people would want to play with a mechanic that has such horrible philosophical underpinning. Please tell me why you like playing with a system that anyone who has any clue how morality and philosophy works would laugh at?

I don't think the Elemental book is introducing a new power source. Its just themed classes like Heroes of Shadow.

Actually you did a remarkable job of describing the Arena Fighter in 4E. So much so that I thought you were partially trolling until the description went off the rails with wears no armor.

A lightly armored fighter who darts and weaves between his enemies. Congratulations you just described a rogue. There is no single concept of fighter though. 4E does a good job of differentiating between the different concepts.

Uhhh... There is a mobility based fighter which emphasises mobility at the cost of a slightly lower armor class.

I hope I get one. <input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

Nope. Those are classes and actually have no indication to what they do except for people who have played the game for 40 years especially with Wizard. As Darwinism correctly pointed out its the train phenomenon at its finest.

Can I call Pathfinder, 3.5E, and 2E Diablo wannabees then?

Are you kidding me? I only know of Paizo because of Wizards of the Coast. Someone who has never played a roleplaying game in his life is going to have is going to have a greater chance of learning about D&D than Paizo can ever hope to achieve.

Really? I would say that 4E books generally speaking are the ones most aimed at people who have never played before.

Master at Arms is actually better than a every weapon expertise. Its also a quick draw feat which actually makes it really well done for builds like the Arena fighter with its multiple proficiencies.

Actually, I've seen adventures from WoTC that actually are decently written adventures that run off in multiple directions. I actually picked up the 3.5E Shadowdale book because its premise was one where you were trying to incite a riot to overthrow an occupation by doing activities to actually...

That is because you are describing a campaign setting and not an adventure path.

You picked a bad example because if anyone is likely to bloody the enemy its the cleric because he has to attack first. Riders on powers always resolve in the order they read which means that the cleric attacks and then everyone else does. There are actually a few powers where this...