Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Kzach" data-source="post: 4455510" data-attributes="member: 56189">Do you encourage or enforce balanced and optimised groups or do you just let the group make whatever characters and classes and roles they want, however they want?I realised something whilst discussing in other threads that I've become somewhat draconian on this issue. It bugs me if a group isn't balanced or if someone isn't fulfilling their role well.This, however, seems to go against the grain of the 'roleplayers'. I don't mean that in a derogatory sense, it's just that I tend to view roleplaying as just one part of a holistic whole, which includes character and group optimisation, not as the be all and end all.Have you found that balanced groups fair better than unbalanced ones? Have you found that not optimising your characters has hurt the party or that it just doesn't matter?I tend to see 4e as being a fairly well-tuned machine. Deviating either side of the course has compound effects, rather than just minimal bumps. This strongly reminds me of my time spent playing World of Warcraft.And that's from where I get this attitude. Getting to an instance only to find your tank is specced MS and has DPS gear on, or finding your priest is shadow and has zero mana regen or spirit gear, or finding your rogue is lolstep maces, or your hunter has no idea how to trap, etc. is really annoying.People invest their time and energy and resources into playing a game that involves other people. To me, everyone at the table should consider everyone else's needs, and not just their own. In other words, don't turn up to an instance with Gorehowl, expecting to tank.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Kzach, post: 4455510, member: 56189"] Do you encourage or enforce balanced and optimised groups or do you just let the group make whatever characters and classes and roles they want, however they want? I realised something whilst discussing in other threads that I've become somewhat draconian on this issue. It bugs me if a group isn't balanced or if someone isn't fulfilling their role well. This, however, seems to go against the grain of the 'roleplayers'. I don't mean that in a derogatory sense, it's just that I tend to view roleplaying as just one part of a holistic whole, which includes character and group optimisation, not as the be all and end all. Have you found that balanced groups fair better than unbalanced ones? Have you found that not optimising your characters has hurt the party or that it just doesn't matter? I tend to see 4e as being a fairly well-tuned machine. Deviating either side of the course has compound effects, rather than just minimal bumps. This strongly reminds me of my time spent playing World of Warcraft. And that's from where I get this attitude. Getting to an instance only to find your tank is specced MS and has DPS gear on, or finding your priest is shadow and has zero mana regen or spirit gear, or finding your rogue is lolstep maces, or your hunter has no idea how to trap, etc. is really annoying. People invest their time and energy and resources into playing a game that involves other people. To me, everyone at the table should consider everyone else's needs, and not just their own. In other words, don't turn up to an instance with Gorehowl, expecting to tank. [/QUOTE]

Verification