Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="kevtar" data-source="post: 5907302" data-attributes="member: 27098">Yeah, there were a lot of spells in previous editions as well. I guess what made that seem more manageable and less of a headache was that I didn't feel &quot;confronted&quot; by the number of spells every time I leveled up. For example, in previous editions, if I played a fighter or rogue and I increased in a level, I didn't have to sort through 100+ spells. If I was playing a spell caster, I had to &quot;find&quot; those spells as opposed to having them automatically presented as a choice.Now that sounds like I'm bashing 4e, which I'm not. I like the idea of PCs have options and features when leveling, but what I didn't like was, as I leveled, I had to sort through hundreds of powers - with many of those powers failing to really serve a particular niche or be demonstratively different from other powers in the game (or even in that class).So perhaps my definition of &quot;glut&quot; not only includes the sheer number of elements (be they spell, power or maneuver), but also the quality or distinctiveness of that element. It seems that, in a system where a PC automatically gains an element at leveling, the greater the number of elements from which the player has to choose also means the greater the probability for less-meaningful options for the player (due to overly-similar powers, etc.).In short, I agree with you (lol). IMO, a PC with 24 maneuvers isn't necessarily going to be more interesting to play than a PC with 8 well-designed maneuvers. I hope that in D&amp;Dnext, maneuvers, tricks and the like will be fewer in number, with multiple uses, and provide the PC with qualities that define that class.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="kevtar, post: 5907302, member: 27098"] Yeah, there were a lot of spells in previous editions as well. I guess what made that [I]seem[/I] more manageable and less of a headache was that I didn't feel "confronted" by the number of spells every time I leveled up. For example, in previous editions, if I played a fighter or rogue and I increased in a level, I didn't have to sort through 100+ spells. If I was playing a spell caster, I had to "find" those spells as opposed to having them automatically presented as a choice. Now that sounds like I'm bashing 4e, which I'm not. I like the idea of PCs have options and features when leveling, but what I didn't like was, as I leveled, I had to sort through hundreds of powers - with many of those powers failing to really serve a particular niche or be demonstratively different from other powers in the game (or even in that class). So perhaps my definition of "glut" not only includes the sheer number of elements (be they spell, power or maneuver), but also the quality or distinctiveness of that element. It seems that, in a system where a PC automatically gains an element at leveling, the greater the number of elements from which the player has to choose also means the greater the probability for less-meaningful options for the player (due to overly-similar powers, etc.). In short, I agree with you (lol). IMO, a PC with 24 maneuvers isn't necessarily going to be more interesting to play than a PC with 8 well-designed maneuvers. I hope that in D&Dnext, maneuvers, tricks and the like will be fewer in number, with multiple uses, and provide the PC with qualities that define that class. [/QUOTE]

Verification