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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 5356648" data-attributes="member: 48965">Hey Scribble, first let me say I am not arguing with how you felt about 4e... but I would like to give my take on the things you cite... especially as it compares to 3e.  Can't see it... wasn't my old school fighter both a defender and a striker (like essentials <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />). I just don't see the roles,in earlier versions of D&D as artificially rigid and sectioned off as they were in classic 4e.  I don't know if I agree with this either. I don't see a bunch of stuff actually happening in less time unless you specifically decide to flavor it as such (or use a special power like a daily or encounter... but then some feats and class abilities in 3.x had the same effect). I guess 4e's lack of fluff and mechanical emphasis where "just make up what is happening" was the rule of the day could certainly cause different people to have totally different views of what a roll to hit means (but when I look at twin strike... I personally see two rolls to hit = two strikes)... and I agree your view is just as valid as any other, but I mean people couldn't even agree on what knocking prone actually meant... or many of the other conditions and actions in classic 4e...as far as what was objectively going on in the gameworld.  A little confused by this one because well we did this in every edition of D&D... It was formalized into 5 mins with 4e but I'm not seeing this as old school specific.  Resting after a fight almost doesn't seem even D&D specific...Lol.  In Vampire, after a fight we rest and heal up with blood points...   This one I can actually see and agree with. Though I'm not sure which design principle I like better. I definitely think different rules is better from a "sell them more stuff" approach... since crunch can't cross pollinate.  And this does the opposite for me. In oldschool D&D you didn't have 50 million Orc's with slight variations on what their "powers" were... dependant upon an artificial role categorization.  In old school D&D a player could actually encounter a monster and learn it's behavior, attacks, etc. in case he encountered it again.  Rituals and "everyone can cast magic with just a feat", for me is... definitely nowhere near old school. 1e largely used this as fluff that was left in the DM's hands mechanically... 4e formalized it and threw it open to any class who wanted it with a feat and no real DM control. Essentials goes back in the opposite direction.  Well I don't find 4e particularly easy to houserule for... especially since besides damage there aren't rules for building classes, assigning powers to monsters or even creating original magic items... yet 4e classic has a focus on "balance" at it's heart (which again is definitely not old school). anyway those were just a few of my thoughts on it.</blockquote>

Verification