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="Fox Lee" data-source="post: 6078291" data-attributes="member: 4346">It's great to see somebody say a thing like that <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> I was pretty heavily invested in 3.5 myself, so I was really sceptical of 4e, but I made a point of trying it anyway because I wanted to be fair. But even now, as an advocate of 4e, I would still play a 3.5e/Pathfinder game if another player in my group wanted to run one - I don't think they're bad systems overall, just not the best for what I want.Your issues seem legitimate - I didn't find them any worse than in 3.5, but that may be because we also played with 3.5's more time-per-turn-intensive mechanics, like the Bo9S and Psionics. The main timewaster at our table isn't conditions but decision-making - worrying too much about which ability to use and where to move - and that's pretty much a given for our group unless the system forgoes tactical combat (or makes it needlessly easy - both would pretty much defeat the purpose for us).Anyway, I think being willing to reconsider their opinion on something in light of new argumenst speaks well of a person, so I just wanted to say kudos to you <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> I'm glad my ramblings could contribute something interesting to your experience.</blockquote>

Verification