Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nemesis Destiny" data-source="post: 5431809" data-attributes="member: 98255">I'm right there with you. I hated the design philosophy behind 3.x, and hence even earlier editions. I loved that 4e threw all that on its ear.That said, I also like that being able to play a fighter with tons of options and powers is appealing to me, but that it is not necessary.Some of the gamers in my group love playing, but frankly lack the interest in the tactical options required to keep up to the spellcasters. For those players, Slayers and Knights and Thieves are a godsend.And not only them; even I have thought it would be fun to use some of them for certain concepts. Less time picking "just the right power" means more time to think up some outlandish or gristly flavour text for what I am about to do, even if, in game terms, it is little more than an MBA.But like I said, some players enjoy the game at the 'spamming your MBA' level, and anything more complicated paralyzes them with indecision. It sounds odd, but it happens in my group with certain players every time we get into a fight. And come level-up time? Ugh. I either have to hand-hold some through the decision making process, or I get glazed over looks and a disinterested "yeah, that one is fine, whatever" at the first power listed that does more damage than the others and is little more than an MBA with extra [W]s attached. The Essentials builds are dead simple to play, but still mechanically viable.Nobody is forcing anybody (outside of sanctioned events) to use this material! That's the part that I don't understand; can't we all just get along?I'm sorry Aegeri, I respect your posts and opinions usually, but I fail to see any overarching conspiracy here. New builds that don't resemble old builds do not make it so that you cannot use the old builds anymore. There is already more material published for this game than pretty much any group will be able to use in several decades of gaming. What's the harm in trying to ALSO appeal to others who may have differing tastes? The game CAN and DOES support BOTH. Simultaneously even.  So nobody is forcing people who don't like it to use it. Without it, mixed with older material, or standalone, it's still D&D. I understand what you're saying, but I think that it's heading into hyperbole territory. There are enough people that like the old design enough that support for it will not truly end or even be supplanted, but supplemented.I'm not arguing that they aren't in a difficult position; they are. No doubt. But calling Essentials the Deathblow of 4e would be sensationalism at best. If 4e dies, it will be in spite of Essentials. The Splatbook mentality was already making death saves, and if they'd clung to that, 4e would have died anyway, Essentials or no Essentials. Any blame would be pure scapegoatism. I hate using -isms, but there you go: two in one paragraph.</blockquote>

Verification