Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Primitive Screwhead" data-source="post: 4057336" data-attributes="member: 20805">IMHO.... all of them.&nbsp;Otherwise the 'problems' would have been readily HR'd out of the game.3e was great because the mechanics fit neatly into a tightly functioning system, quite unlike the patchwork quilts of earlier versions where there were multiple mini-games stuck together.3e was horrible because the mechanics fit too tightly together and altering one piece would trigger fatal errors elsewhere.One of the reasons for this was that the underpinning assumptions were not known outside of WoTC. Any HR had the potential to completely off balance the game. And some 'official rules' ran into the same problem.One thing that I am looking forward to in 4e is that the underpinning assumptions are defined, making it easier to tweak the system without unbalancing. An example of this is the reported ability to replace magic items with a straight level based bonus.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Primitive Screwhead, post: 4057336, member: 20805"] IMHO.... all of them. Otherwise the 'problems' would have been readily HR'd out of the game. 3e was great because the mechanics fit neatly into a tightly functioning system, quite unlike the patchwork quilts of earlier versions where there were multiple mini-games stuck together. 3e was horrible because the mechanics fit too tightly together and altering one piece would trigger fatal errors elsewhere. One of the reasons for this was that the underpinning assumptions were not known outside of WoTC. Any HR had the potential to completely off balance the game. And some 'official rules' ran into the same problem. One thing that I am looking forward to in 4e is that the underpinning assumptions are defined, making it easier to tweak the system without unbalancing. An example of this is the reported ability to replace magic items with a straight level based bonus. [/QUOTE]

Verification