Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 5959277" data-attributes="member: 22424">Okay, I'll preface this by noting that I'm not exactly a big fan of 4e (it's actually my least favourite edition). However, there are some features that I really like...- For me, probably the single best feature of 4e is monster and encounter design. The model of "role + level gives baseline, pick some powers, make some small mods, and you're good to go" for monsters is a really strong one (though I can see it causing problems for WotC - it's too easy to use, so they have limited market for monster books!). And the construction of having an XP budget, coupled with the advice on blending different monster roles is likewise very strong. (It's just a shame that their adventure writers didn't realise that an adventure needed to be more than a series of interesting combats.)- I really like the 4e implementation of action points. Only thing I'd change would be to give 1 per encounter, on a "use it or lose it" basis.- I like the 4e handling of both gods and artifacts.- I like the class roles, but I think they were way too explicit with them. Making it clear that the Bard was a Cleric-substitute was a really good thing (since previously it had been the ideal class if you wanted to be able to do everything kinda badly). But locking in every class so it had one role, and so the game would hurt you if you tried to deviate from it... not so good. (And yes, I exaggerate. But, still, they went too far.)- I also liked a lot of the formalisation of the language. Standard/Move/Minor actions were a good thing, as were At-will/Encounter/Daily powers. I didn't like the way that they felt the need to fill in every design space, even much-needed spaces, but the basic framework was surprisingly good.And, since you asked, the things that I really didn't like:- I hated the 1-1-1-1 diagonals. I'm not going to rehash the why of it here - there are long and annoying threads elsewhere if you really want to know. (For that matter, I didn't like that 4e all-but-required the use of the combat grid in the first place.)- By locking down so much of what a character could do into his powers (and thus onto cards), the game also seemed to lock down too much of the player's thinking - most turns consisted of looking at the six specific cards the player had and determining which of these was the best to use. (Again, the game tried to avoid this... but it largely failed IMX.)- I didn't like the massive proliferation of options, which made the Character Builder absolutely essential for me to consider playing the game. Any required electronic component is a deal-breaker for me going forward.- And likewise, I hated the constant errata. There was a spell where my Wizard's powers changed every single session, which is really not acceptable.</blockquote>

Verification