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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Zustiur" data-source="post: 4694168" data-attributes="member: 1544">No. They exist. That's the basis of this whole thread. For me this all comes back to a preference on the quantity of wuxia. Basic attacks must exist to satiate a desire for believability (which for some, is required for fun). Key point: One of the things I really detest about 4E is the premise that all characters are already heroes. I cannot stand this idea, because it pushes characters up to what used to be say 3rd or 4th level by comparison. I want my 1st level characters who aren't much better than commoners. Characters who have to earn their hero status.Basic attacks are required to give that feeling of 'not much more than a commoner'. Moreover they must be used frequently, even into the levels where the characters have achieved hero status compared with 'the general populace'. At-Will powers being automatically better than basic attacks, to the point where you suggest pretending they don't even exist, ruins that feeling.Yes... which you only get to have two of, for any character. And which you 'spam' every round. Compare with complaints about players/characters who spam disarm or sunder every round... It's ANNOYING and that detracts from the game.Did you have and use all of those at full competency at level 1? Or did your characters have to learn and improve them throughout the game? I prefer the latter method.Characters start off as nobodys, and eventually learn to do cool things all the time. Those would be cantrips... Magic missile became a cantrip by that line of thought. See my earlier complaint about wuxia and starting off slow.Whereas, I'm not happy to skip that phase. It might help understanding if I point out that my various gaming groups never started above 1st level. And that throughout our attempts at 3rd edition, we never got beyond 6th level (due to life getting in the way). That formative stage with the bow is DND to me.Again, 'some guy with a sword' is where I like to start the game.I would have liked to see formalized rules for 0th level or apprentice level characters being in the PHB or DMG. I got the opposite. Characters effectively start at 3rd level and move up from there. Not my cup of tea.Reason requires a common ground to start from, which we appear not to have. We understand what you're saying. We just disagree based (primarily) on preference.We're not saying that everyone has to play 4E in this manner. We're examining if it is possible to make 4E in to a game that Sadrik or myself would enjoy.We're not trying to tailor the game for those DMs. We're experimenting with tailoring the game for DM's like myself and Sadrik, and whose players enjoy the game so much more, because of that tailoring. Your comments along this line are essentially irrelevant. This thread is about an idea, and making that idea work as best as possible. About identifying the pit falls and mitigating them. Not about selling a product to the widest possible audience.Yes, and you went on to explain that... but you appear to have missed the question. You examined what happens if the mage uses a bow instead of scorching burst... You examined what happens if scorching burst is improved... But you did not examine what happens if both are true.If you do both, how close to even is the end result? Can we take that premise and get it to balance close enough that the existing encounter guidelines work? Or work with a minor tweak?Bear in mind that a number of gaming groups have halved hit points across the board, to speed up combat, without reports of this breaking the balance of encounters.</blockquote>

Verification