Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 4427353" data-attributes="member: 29398">Now that 4e's been around a few months and there's been a chance to digest it (if not play it yet), I'll give it this much:&nbsp; it's a playable game, in and of itself.&nbsp; If I'd never played D+D before and stumbled into a 4e group, I'd probably dive right in.My problem is, I have played before.I agree with those above who suggest the OP's reasons for bailing are mostly on the level of detail rather than root basics (well, except the errata; the perfectionist in me says something designed by professionals should simply not need errata and certainly not this soon).&nbsp; Besides, the art in general rocks compared to 3e and earlier. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />As for the question of should it allow one to make bad choices in the name of flavour or characterization, of course it should!&nbsp; That said, with each new edition the design becomes finer-tuned and as a result &quot;bad&quot; choices have a greater negative impact; and that's a shame.The most fun I had playing 3e was running a character whose &quot;build&quot; would probably make you powergamer types hurl; never mind what would happen in game when her Wisdom 7 showed through, a frequent occurrence!&nbsp; Arguably the best character I've ever had (out of quite a lot, both 1e and 3e), and I wouldn't change a thing about her.Lanefan</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 4427353, member: 29398"] Now that 4e's been around a few months and there's been a chance to digest it (if not play it yet), I'll give it this much: it's a playable game, in and of itself. If I'd never played D+D before and stumbled into a 4e group, I'd probably dive right in. My problem is, I have played before. I agree with those above who suggest the OP's reasons for bailing are mostly on the level of detail rather than root basics (well, except the errata; the perfectionist in me says something designed by professionals should simply not need errata and certainly not this soon). Besides, the art in general rocks compared to 3e and earlier. :) As for the question of should it allow one to make bad choices in the name of flavour or characterization, of course it should! That said, with each new edition the design becomes finer-tuned and as a result "bad" choices have a greater negative impact; and that's a shame. The most fun I had playing 3e was running a character whose "build" would probably make you powergamer types hurl; never mind what would happen in game when her Wisdom 7 showed through, a frequent occurrence! Arguably the best character I've ever had (out of quite a lot, both 1e and 3e), and I wouldn't change a thing about her. Lanefan [/QUOTE]

Verification