Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6347491" data-attributes="member: 6696971">It is cool! So long as the math of the system can handle it, it would be ideal.  I like what 13th Age did with defenses.  I think D&D attacks could be handled similarly.  Take 3 ability scores that make sense in being the primary arbiters in attack resolution for the given archetype.  The middle one wins.  Rogues are Dex, Int, Cha.  Paladins are Str, Wis, Cha.  Fighters are Str, Dex, Wis.  Etc, etc.  Make the math work and you're good.I don't see that as much of an attack.  Looks like orderly, cogent, clear analysis to me.  I don't agree with all of it but that doesn't look to be vacuous, uninformed, ARGGGGGG4EANGRYFIST edition warring.  It doesn't look like a rant either.D&D very much has a hardcore gamist culture at its core.  We try to pretend that it isn't in our collective bloodstream, but it certainly is.  So those temptations are always going to be present.  That being said, I really think this is dependent upon the play agenda.  I know people dispute this, but 4e has very robust noncombat conflict resolution.  I'm used to running noncombat conflict resolution in a number of games and my home 4e games have probably featured a 60:40 ratio of its conflicts being noncombat:combat.  Further, the combats are all pretty intensive and often have another agenda beyond "kill dudes and take their stuff" or "maximize resource efficiency."  My players have created the types of characters they want, but they have certainly been aware that a brutally minmaxed combatant is going to have invested in PC build resources that are useless for a considerable portion of the game.  For instance, the solo PBP I'm running is for a player that was in both of my 1-30 home games.  She has a level 7 Elf Fighter (Slayer).  At level 7, her ability score spread is:Str: 12Con:  14Dex:  18Int:  14Wis:  16Cha:  10That is with + 2 Dex/Wis and + 1 Dex/Wis from level 4.  Of her four feats, only one gives her direct combat potency (expertise).  Two of the others are noncombat directly (Wizard multi which gives her Nature and Ritual Casting and JoaT) and the last one lets her use Dex for MBAs (relevant to our discussion) to capture the elfy finesse archetype.  Both of her Utilities are Skill Powers, with one being a noncombat juggernaut (Mighty Sprint).  Her Theme severely plays into noncombat conflict resolution proficiency rather than combat potency (Ghost of the Past - trained History and reroll a check 1/encounter).  Her Neck Slot item has a passive skill bonus and an activatable one.  Her Armor Slot has a passive one.She has a Bear Companion character.Point being, its not surprising that she has created this character.  She is still a BA in combat (its impossible not to be as a Fighter-Slayer), but she is pretty stunningly awesome outside of it.  All of the characters created for all of the 4e games I've run have this in common.  I think I'll just stick with that and leave the rest of your points be.  I'll just say that I can understand how they would be informed by a certain play experience with 4e.  I don't want to go any deeper than that and risk derailing the thread any further.</blockquote>

Verification