Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JohnSnow" data-source="post: 4039455" data-attributes="member: 32164">I actually think you're misunderstanding Mike's intent, if not the inherent contradiction in what he's saying. I see it as a threefold statement of the approach of the 4E team.A) In presenting a new game, we don't want to overwhelm you with options right out of the gate, so we're focusing on the most "genre-appropriate" first. Which is to say, swinging weapons, casting certain spells, special movement abilities, blocking stuff with shields, and so forth.B) However, we understand there's a demand for some more defined rules for things that the majority might regard as "secondary" or even "corner-case" and we'll get to those in due time.C) For those of you who really want this stuff right out of the gate and are willing to go to the trouble, we'll explain our methodology in the DMG so you can create your own powers and abilities as you see fit. We'll also throw some of the abilities we thought of and considered pretty nifty onto monsters so that you can see one way that they might work mechanically.And I doubt anybody can really argue that's a bad approach, except as regards the setting of priorities (i.e. what should get full treatment in the beginning vs. what gets partial treatment). Of course, some people may just not like "exceptions-based design."</blockquote>