Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="UngeheuerLich" data-source="post: 6659514" data-attributes="member: 59057">Way to ruin a perfectly fine thread. Yes 4e was different. Yes 4e was fun for me. I did like the 4e fighter, but after a few levels I missed maneuvers independent from powers. Although improvising worked wonderful in 4e, in my experience no one did. When I had the chance to play instead of DMing I fell into the same trap. The powers were so neatly written and poerful, that I didn't think about not using them.Was it my fault instead of 4e's fault. Of course it was. But I noticed that my fun is greater without rigid codified powers.Even when using spells as a wizard, which are closely defined powers, I usually end up taking flexible spells over powerful spells.So in a way I agree with both of you. The rules system really tried to further improvising (page 42) but in the end, even those with good intentions ended up not using them very often.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="UngeheuerLich, post: 6659514, member: 59057"] Way to ruin a perfectly fine thread. Yes 4e was different. Yes 4e was fun for me. I did like the 4e fighter, but after a few levels I missed maneuvers independent from powers. Although improvising worked wonderful in 4e, in my experience no one did. When I had the chance to play instead of DMing I fell into the same trap. The powers were so neatly written and poerful, that I didn't think about not using them. Was it my fault instead of 4e's fault. Of course it was. But I noticed that my fun is greater without rigid codified powers. Even when using spells as a wizard, which are closely defined powers, I usually end up taking flexible spells over powerful spells. So in a way I agree with both of you. The rules system really tried to further improvising (page 42) but in the end, even those with good intentions ended up not using them very often. [/QUOTE]

Verification