Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 4431784" data-attributes="member: 710">I noticed something, and I wonder if others agree with me. I am not sure how to put it down precisely, but let me try it this way: 3E gives you more choices at character build time. This also gives the option to intentionally or unintentionally weaken your character in one critical area (be bad at combat, be bad against undead, be bad in social encounters)4E gives you less choices at the character build level, so that it's harder to unintentionally create this weaknesses. If you want to be useless in combat, you have to intentionally ignore the advice to pick good ability scores for your primary statistics. If you want to be bad in social encounters, you have to decide not to pick up any skills that are important in that area (and every class has some skills for that area). If all your character build choices were optimal, you can still screw up during actual gameplay, simply by intentionally or unintentionally missing how to use your abilities effectively. I think 4E is upping up here compared to 3E, since there is a lot of more synergistic benefits in combat, and also outside of combat to some extent - skill challenges require you to identify the useful skills, and use the ones that you are a good at...I believe some people are of the mind set that only the decisions made at character creation tell us something about the options inherent to the system, ignoring the emergent aspects of gameplay...Oh, we did that a lot in 3E, thanks to Leadership. Of course, it also often lead to brain overload at high levels...And sometimes, I just want to play my character. Not two...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mustrum_Ridcully, post: 4431784, member: 710"] I noticed something, and I wonder if others agree with me. I am not sure how to put it down precisely, but let me try it this way: 3E gives you more choices at character build time. This also gives the option to intentionally or unintentionally weaken your character in one critical area (be bad at combat, be bad against undead, be bad in social encounters) 4E gives you less choices at the character build level, so that it's harder to unintentionally create this weaknesses. If you want to be useless in combat, you have to intentionally ignore the advice to pick good ability scores for your primary statistics. If you want to be bad in social encounters, you have to decide not to pick up any skills that are important in that area (and every class has some skills for that area). If all your character build choices were optimal, you can still screw up during actual gameplay, simply by intentionally or unintentionally missing how to use your abilities effectively. I think 4E is upping up here compared to 3E, since there is a lot of more synergistic benefits in combat, and also outside of combat to some extent - skill challenges require you to identify the useful skills, and use the ones that you are a good at... I believe some people are of the mind set that only the decisions made at character creation tell us something about the options inherent to the system, ignoring the emergent aspects of gameplay... Oh, we did that a lot in 3E, thanks to Leadership. Of course, it also often lead to brain overload at high levels... And sometimes, I just want to play [i]my[/i] character. Not two... [/QUOTE]

Verification