Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Grossout" data-source="post: 4095721" data-attributes="member: 45646">QFTThe battlegrid is easily what worries me most about 4E.  A lot of why I skipped 3E was because I thought it was a little too mini-centered.  Now 4E seems to be taking it a step further, which is a shame, because I like a lot of what it seems to offer.  Even Massawyrm's 4E review on aintitcool mentions this problem - and it's practically the only negative he says in the whole 3 part review:"Which leads to the one glaring problem some folks will have with 4E. It is very dependant upon maps, terrain and miniatures. That’s great for guys like me with a closet full of toys. But for others, especially those who like to play much more esoteric games all through discussion rather than using maps and positioning – they’re going to find it a lot harder to covert over to that style of play than 3.5. Most abilities and classes are built around their existence on a map grid. And a lot of the abilities just don’t translate to the abstract. I’m not certain why percentage of players out there still play this way – but they’re going to have the strongest argument against converting to 4E."Ugh!  I would have rather seen ANY other flaw represented.  Oh well, still looks like a good game.  I'll see if I can handle the grid focus come June.</blockquote>