Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="tzor" data-source="post: 2899407" data-attributes="member: 12826">As far as I am concerned 4E needs somethings so radically novel that they make us all go &quot;Ah ha!&nbsp; Why didn't we think of this sooner.&quot;&nbsp; 3E had, among other things positive is good notions in both AC and BAB (as opposed to THAC0) and a freeform multiclass option.&nbsp; If you don't have these Ah ha notions you only get 3.75EOne thing I think 4E would need is a reunification and simplification of class/template options.&nbsp; Right now we have PC, NPC, PRC and a semi official Template Levels option. (Actually we have multiple ones from WOTC and non WOTC sources.)&nbsp; Why, for example are NPC classes so lame?&nbsp; (If you really want weaker NPCs why not ust give them lower levels; level equality was supposed to be the Ah ha of 3E, especially from the 1E days when one really could argue that a level X wizard was the equivalent of a level Y monk, but a level X+5 wizard was not the equivalent of a level Y+5 monk.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="tzor, post: 2899407, member: 12826"] As far as I am concerned 4E needs somethings so radically novel that they make us all go "Ah ha! Why didn't we think of this sooner." 3E had, among other things positive is good notions in both AC and BAB (as opposed to THAC0) and a freeform multiclass option. If you don't have these Ah ha notions you only get 3.75E One thing I think 4E would need is a reunification and simplification of class/template options. Right now we have PC, NPC, PRC and a semi official Template Levels option. (Actually we have multiple ones from WOTC and non WOTC sources.) Why, for example are NPC classes so lame? (If you really want weaker NPCs why not ust give them lower levels; level equality was supposed to be the Ah ha of 3E, especially from the 1E days when one really could argue that a level X wizard was the equivalent of a level Y monk, but a level X+5 wizard was not the equivalent of a level Y+5 monk. [/QUOTE]

Verification