Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Nifft" data-source="post: 5383949" data-attributes="member: 6562">Stealth got changed, skill challenges were completely re-done, and some things were just plain re-written (like Magic Missile). A lot of classes got stealth errata by the virtue of simply getting new stuff which completely eclipsed the old stuff. For example, look at how many single-target psychic Will attacks there are on the Wizard spell list.&nbsp;See, in my group, we had both a Fighter and a Paladin. Neither was played by a power-gamer. Every single session, the Fighter's player was all kinds of HELL YEAH, while the Paladin's player was frustrated.So yes, the core Paladin does suck the fun right out of the game for some people. Bad designs do have a negative impact on games.&nbsp;It was as decent as Twin Strike, which is to say it was among the 3 most powerful at-wills in the game.Now that it's been nerfed it's merely quite good.&nbsp;Well, the errata that I worry about is the big sweeping system-changing stuff. I'm sure there are printing errors, editing errors, etc. which may need to be corrected, but there's a difference between that stuff and the designers changing their minds (like they did with the role of Controller), or with the designers not knowing the full implications of their decisions (like recently, they decided that scaling bonuses are bad, and replaced them with fixed power bonuses + a feat tax, THEN they decided that feat taxes are too boring and added some more interesting feat tax choices).I think we're pretty much done with the broad, sweeping system changes. I think the 4e system is now a well understood space. I don't think you'll see even a tenth the errata for Essentials that you did for the original core books, and I'm willing to bet that the errata that we do see is trivial in comparison.Cheers, -- N</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Nifft, post: 5383949, member: 6562"] Stealth got changed, skill challenges were completely re-done, and some things were just plain re-written (like Magic Missile). A lot of classes got stealth errata by the virtue of simply getting new stuff which completely eclipsed the old stuff. For example, look at how many single-target psychic Will attacks there are on the Wizard spell list. See, in my group, we had both a Fighter and a Paladin. Neither was played by a power-gamer. Every single session, the Fighter's player was all kinds of HELL YEAH, while the Paladin's player was frustrated. So yes, the core Paladin [b]does[/b] suck the fun right out of the game for some people. Bad designs [b]do[/b] have a negative impact on games. It was as decent as Twin Strike, which is to say it was among the 3 most powerful at-wills in the game. Now that it's been nerfed it's merely quite good. Well, the errata that I worry about is the big sweeping system-changing stuff. I'm sure there are printing errors, editing errors, etc. which may need to be corrected, but there's a difference between that stuff and the designers [b]changing their minds[/b] (like they did with the role of Controller), or with the designers not knowing the full implications of their decisions (like recently, they decided that scaling bonuses are bad, and replaced them with fixed power bonuses + a feat tax, THEN they decided that feat taxes are too boring and added some more interesting feat tax choices). I think we're pretty much done with the broad, sweeping system changes. I think the 4e system is now a well understood space. I don't think you'll see even a tenth the errata for Essentials that you did for the original core books, and I'm willing to bet that the errata that we do see is trivial in comparison. Cheers, -- N [/QUOTE]

Verification