Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Herobizkit" data-source="post: 5141844" data-attributes="member: 36150">A few random thoughts:a) re: classes.&nbsp; Blue Rose (precursor to True20) presented three character classes: Adept, Warrior, Expert.&nbsp; Adepts learned magic the easiest, Warriors had the most health and learned the most weapon skills, and Experts learned skills.&nbsp; With the correct feats, Warriors and Experts could learn spells, Adepts and Warriors could learn new skills, and Adepts and Experts could become skilled in better weapons.&nbsp; It seems like every class is an amalgam of one or more (or all) of these.The 4e Bard's strength is its versatility; it can take on the jobs of most of the other classes.&nbsp; If a whole group of players made Bards, each player would likely gravitate towards skills, feats et al that would cater to his playing style and summarize his role as Leader, Defender or what have you.&nbsp; So why this couldn't be the standard, well... I don't know.b) re: dungeon as adventure.&nbsp; At its core, a dungeon is simply a group of rooms filled with monsters and treasure.&nbsp; It could theoretically be one long tunnel with rooms for encounters and a boss at the end.&nbsp; Whether a PC goes &quot;left&quot; or &quot;right&quot; in a maze becomes largely irrelevant, as most players are smart enough to &quot;follow the wall&quot; until they find what they're looking for.&nbsp; A dungeon as an adventure is little different than a wilderness adventure (in a dungeon, your choices of direction are more limited, but the end result of getting from 'A' to 'boss' is still the same), save for the actual setting itself.c) re: resource management.&nbsp; 4e has taken great pains to remove the tedium from most RM, so why mess with it?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Herobizkit, post: 5141844, member: 36150"] A few random thoughts: a) re: classes. Blue Rose (precursor to True20) presented three character classes: Adept, Warrior, Expert. Adepts learned magic the easiest, Warriors had the most health and learned the most weapon skills, and Experts learned skills. With the correct feats, Warriors and Experts could learn spells, Adepts and Warriors could learn new skills, and Adepts and Experts could become skilled in better weapons. It seems like every class is an amalgam of one or more (or all) of these. The 4e Bard's strength is its versatility; it can take on the jobs of most of the other classes. If a whole group of players made Bards, each player would likely gravitate towards skills, feats et al that would cater to his playing style and summarize his role as Leader, Defender or what have you. So why this couldn't be the standard, well... I don't know. b) re: dungeon as adventure. At its core, a dungeon is simply a group of rooms filled with monsters and treasure. It could theoretically be one long tunnel with rooms for encounters and a boss at the end. Whether a PC goes "left" or "right" in a maze becomes largely irrelevant, as most players are smart enough to "follow the wall" until they find what they're looking for. A dungeon as an adventure is little different than a wilderness adventure (in a dungeon, your choices of direction are more limited, but the end result of getting from 'A' to 'boss' is still the same), save for the actual setting itself. c) re: resource management. 4e has taken great pains to remove the tedium from most RM, so why mess with it? [/QUOTE]

Verification