Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 5467299" data-attributes="member: 87792">It's pretty poor.&nbsp;&nbsp;That's a world away from the effect I want.&nbsp; Bull Rush replaces the attack.&nbsp; What I want is someone who is large and in the face of the opponent.&nbsp; It's what's done by the shoulders, the hips, and the footwork - not what's done by the entire attack.&nbsp; I don't want to push them.&nbsp; I want to get so far up in their faces when I'm attacking that they need to step back - a vastly different matter.&nbsp; 4e on the other hand normally supports me building characters who think and move the way I want them to.&nbsp;I'm not building the character concept around a power.&nbsp; The general approach in combat reflects the concept.&nbsp; And that I can't reflexively fight with sword and board the way I myself do is ... annoying.&nbsp;&nbsp;If your concept involves disarming as a stock tactic, a bit, yes.&nbsp;&nbsp;And once again you miss the point.&nbsp; This isn't how people fight on the fly.&nbsp; It's how they fight when they can't see anything better to do.&nbsp; The sort of stuff that should be the default.&nbsp;&nbsp;There are a number of reasons I have no wish to play RCFG - but if I wanted to play the style of game it's written for, it sounds like a good one.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 5467299, member: 87792"] It's pretty poor. That's a world away from the effect I want. Bull Rush replaces the attack. What I want is someone who is large and in the face of the opponent. It's what's done by the shoulders, the hips, and the footwork - not what's done by the entire attack. I don't want to push them. I want to get so far up in their faces when I'm attacking that they need to step back - a vastly different matter. 4e on the other hand normally supports me building characters who think and move the way I want them to. I'm not building the character concept around a power. The general approach in combat reflects the concept. And that I [I]can't[/I] reflexively fight with sword and board the way I myself do is ... annoying. If your concept involves disarming as a stock tactic, a bit, yes. And once again you miss the point. This isn't how people fight [I]on the fly[/I]. It's how they fight [I]when they can't see anything better to do[/I]. The sort of stuff that should be the default. There are a number of reasons I have no wish to play RCFG - but if I wanted to play the style of game it's written for, it sounds like a good one. [/QUOTE]

Verification