Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Numion" data-source="post: 2321968" data-attributes="member: 124">Your strange definitions aside, I noticed that group tactics are much more important in 3e than previous games I've played. The AoO's and all the options made it possible to try to organize the adventuring group in different lines of defence, so that the meleers and spellcasters can support each other. One common tactic, for example, is for the meleers to protect the archers and casters from melee. In previous editions it tended to be every man for himself, since there wasn't a way to stop anyone from just walking past you laying the smack on the wizzard, sorry, magic-user&nbsp; :\ Your assertion that 3e was only good for solo games makes IMO no sense at all. There's hardly no point un utilizing all the rules if you've got one combatant. 3e really shines in group level combats. Thats how it affected our games - the group started to fight as a group!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Numion, post: 2321968, member: 124"] Your strange definitions aside, I noticed that group tactics are much more important in 3e than previous games I've played. The AoO's and all the options made it possible to try to organize the adventuring group in different lines of defence, so that the meleers and spellcasters can support each other. One common tactic, for example, is for the meleers to protect the archers and casters from melee. In previous editions it tended to be every man for himself, since there wasn't a way to stop anyone from just walking past you laying the smack on the wizzard, sorry, magic-user :\ Your assertion that 3e was only good for solo games makes IMO no sense at all. There's hardly no point un utilizing all the rules if you've got one combatant. 3e really shines in [I]group[/I] level combats. Thats how it affected our games - the group started to fight as a group! [/QUOTE]

Verification