eamon
Explorer
What a way to take things out of context.
In a normal 4e game does the presence of a PC that does not meaningfully contribute to combat increase or decrease the fun?
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
C4, the Best Edition Never Published
- Thread starter C4
- Start date
In a normal 4e game does the presence of a PC that does not meaningfully contribute to combat increase or decrease the fun?
I had to post.
iḿ one of those players, I build characters for thier story validiy etc. Some of the most memorable moments are when my hapless monk manages to combo the enemy and wiping them out yet usally is saved from near death.(again) or charges out of reach of the hearler and is Double 20-ed, or cant take two hits in a row.
so screw you guys that insist that my monk should be weak cos i chose mis-matching class/race combos.
iḿ one of those players, I build characters for thier story validiy etc. Some of the most memorable moments are when my hapless monk manages to combo the enemy and wiping them out yet usally is saved from near death.(again) or charges out of reach of the hearler and is Double 20-ed, or cant take two hits in a row.
so screw you guys that insist that my monk should be weak cos i chose mis-matching class/race combos.
Jack Colby
First Post
It is rather curious that WotC has not released official "updates" to early classes that have obvious problems due to being early 4E designs. They had no problem retooling the entire skill challenge rules when it was noticed they didn't work as intended. Why not do the same for the classes, etc?
And no, I am not saying the early classes are unplayable as-is, I just think it's pretty clear they could be better designed, and had some unusual aspects that were not understood until the game was released and played extensively.
C4, what you are doing is interesting, and something I agree that WotC should have already done. Maybe this will be a nice wakeup call to say "people want to see this done."
And no, I am not saying the early classes are unplayable as-is, I just think it's pretty clear they could be better designed, and had some unusual aspects that were not understood until the game was released and played extensively.
C4, what you are doing is interesting, and something I agree that WotC should have already done. Maybe this will be a nice wakeup call to say "people want to see this done."
I know, right? Especially since the big hubbub over the errata to magic missile, it's surprising that WotC hasn't implemented some of the really simple and intuitive fixes (like Constifying starlock powers) that fix actual problems.
Maybe, but I'm a cynic. If WotC implemented even some of the fixes I've included in C4, I'd be overjoyed and probably drop this project right then and there. But I'm not holding my breath.
Now to finish arcane...jesum, there's a lot of them! 
invokethehojo
First Post
I applaud you sir, good form!
If only this were available 6 months ago, we might not have stopped playing 4e. We considered doing the type of thing you are doing, but we tried that with 3e and found it took too much time to get it right. Glad to see someone out there is dedicated. If I knew how to give you xp I would gladly do so, though I'm sure this is a handle you have created purely for this thread and therefore wouldn't care anyway.
good luck
If only this were available 6 months ago, we might not have stopped playing 4e. We considered doing the type of thing you are doing, but we tried that with 3e and found it took too much time to get it right. Glad to see someone out there is dedicated. If I knew how to give you xp I would gladly do so, though I'm sure this is a handle you have created purely for this thread and therefore wouldn't care anyway.
good luck
