Propheous_D
First Post
So I am under the impression that the new combat model is based on a philosophy of damage over time vs burst damage. This means that we will be on average doing less damage each round but more damage over physical time. Meaning that with the new system it takes less physical time to play out a round, but you require more rounds to accomplish the same goals then in say 3E.
Going on that thread of thought then I personally believe that 4E characters are all most deadlier then 3E characters. The reason being that on average they will have the ability to deal more damage in combat over all. This comes from the loss of negative Bab for multiple attacks, Casters having less downtime rounds, and not having to worry about full attack action positioning.
I don't know about the rest of you but in higher level campaigns especially with inexperienced players it could get rediculous the down time between rounds of combat. I think that this choice alone could be one of the things that really makes 4E worth playing.
Going on that thread of thought then I personally believe that 4E characters are all most deadlier then 3E characters. The reason being that on average they will have the ability to deal more damage in combat over all. This comes from the loss of negative Bab for multiple attacks, Casters having less downtime rounds, and not having to worry about full attack action positioning.
I don't know about the rest of you but in higher level campaigns especially with inexperienced players it could get rediculous the down time between rounds of combat. I think that this choice alone could be one of the things that really makes 4E worth playing.