NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gorgoroth" data-source="post: 6073364" data-attributes="member: 6674889">As a PC, when I know the door I'm beating down is tougher because I'm stronger now, it kind of ruins the benefit of levelling and I see the code behind the Matrix. //immersion lost.I did love 4e optimisation for a while, precisely because it reminded me, as did the OP, of various RTS games (I make videogames for a living, so I end up wanting to play stuff other than CRPGs when I'm actually playing pen and paper with my buddies... wierd huh). The biggest problems with 4e have been well discussed in this forum, and it mirrors my experience. I remember the first 4e combat I had in that official module...the kobolds took seemingly forever to kill. This is something that should never have gotten through extensive and rigorous playtesting like is going on now for Next. Light skirmish battles should NOT play like big set piece end-game battles. I love minis too, but it was just insane the amount of time spent. Had it been all chaps of my caliber of speed at my turn, (as a result of knowing my strategies well and general brainiac-ness...not to say other players weren't super smart, but I spent an inordinate amount of time reading the forums to know every twist and turn of my powers), we would have merely run into the issue that it's simply unfair to play a chess-like game like 4e, 4-6 against one DM. The DM would have to be a grandmaster at strategy to compete with us, and even then...good luck tweaking the monsters to not get p0wned. If the DM spends less time than the combined total of his players (or even one of them, like me), things would have been more even. But as it is in most games, there are players with various levels of strategic wit (especially in realtime), and there are broken or unbalanced combos even in a game that prides itself on balance-is-god (==fail...what a useless goal, IMO...don't nerf stuff into oblivion the first errata that comes out after the book is published...jeeez). As a consumer, Wotc p*ssed me off several times like when I purchased MP2 and they errata'ed SWS for rangers in exactly the same way they errata'ed SCS a few months earlier. It is beyond the pale of annoyance to feel like a pawn in their petty "publish OP power with the intention of 0-day nerf"-to turn a quick profit. Also, some of the coolest stuff you can imagine happens in 3 or even 4-d...and 4e is strictly 2d where all the game takes place, on a 2-d battle grid. D&D in previous editions abhors ground-level focus starting at level 5 when a wizard can fly. It has massive implications to a game system where for all intents and purposes, you cannot leave the ground until level 21. I detested 4e when I realized my dragonborn would never fly. I stuck to it for a while, but it was dead and already a foregone conclusion...no matter how many GMs I played with at the local gaming store (many...) and the revolving door of other players...every time we'd try to run a 4e game the DMs would get tired of it and revert to Pathfinder. Every....single....time. 4e was a massive failure, let's not kid ourselves. I had some great times in it, but over three years of playing it compared with 1 year of PF, I had so much more fun creatively and story-wise, exploration, character creation-wise...that I had to admit to myself, 4e is a big waste of time, if you want to play an RTS play it on the computer, or a card-game play Magic. Other people on this thread have it right, it was more than likely a game designed to sell magic cards and force people to play with a battle grid. You cannot play 4e without a battle grid, and not nerf the players. PF plays fine with or without...the big end-game set pieces can use it to have fine-tuned control....of course it's not a perfect system and after reading the Next rules I realize how much I detest the Full Attack rule...ugh. I will never again play any RPG that forces a melee'r to be less mobile in combat lest he lost 80% of his damage per round compared to a caster that loses none of his effectiveness (and I love casters too...I just think that's not a fun rule for fighters to have to get Pounce to keep up their DPR)</blockquote>

Verification