Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="The Little Raven" data-source="post: 4154166" data-attributes="member: 10095">&quot;They're being told they're not SUPPOSED to play the game like that.&quot;So, you're saying that 4e's choice of beginning play (hero) is telling you that you're doing it wrong because you have a different desire for beginning play (non-hero). Then, you're turning around and saying that 3e's choice of beginning play (non-hero) isn't telling me that I'm doing it wrong because I have a different desire for beginning play (hero).Sounds like another &quot;3e is the holy grail&quot; argument, since the exact same thing applies (one version supports one play style far better than the other).Nothing's stopping you from making a crappy character. You can ignore your per-day and per-encounters. You can lower your hit point total. Reduce your attack roll. Hell, not even roll an attack roll.Sure they can. I make Gilgamesh, and you make the kid that fell of the turnip truck. I'll get all my class powers, and you'll ignore them. Problem solved. You've got your doorstop character and I've got my hero, and everyone should be happy.Just don't complain that I can do more with Gilgamesh, since you intentionally decided to play a substandard character.D&amp;D has chosen Gilgamesh after like 30 years of favoring the turd farmer, because playing a turd farmer isn't exactly a match for a &quot;heroic fantasy&quot; game.And nothing makes it harder to play 1st-level turd farmers. It's simple: intentionally shaft your character.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="The Little Raven, post: 4154166, member: 10095"] "They're being told they're not SUPPOSED to play the game like that." So, you're saying that 4e's choice of beginning play (hero) is telling you that you're doing it wrong because you have a different desire for beginning play (non-hero). Then, you're turning around and saying that 3e's choice of beginning play (non-hero) isn't telling me that I'm doing it wrong because I have a different desire for beginning play (hero). Sounds like another "3e is the holy grail" argument, since the exact same thing applies (one version supports one play style far better than the other). Nothing's stopping you from making a crappy character. You can ignore your per-day and per-encounters. You can lower your hit point total. Reduce your attack roll. Hell, not even roll an attack roll. Sure they can. I make Gilgamesh, and you make the kid that fell of the turnip truck. I'll get all my class powers, and you'll ignore them. Problem solved. You've got your doorstop character and I've got my hero, and everyone should be happy. Just don't complain that I can do more with Gilgamesh, since you intentionally decided to play a substandard character. D&D has chosen Gilgamesh after like 30 years of favoring the turd farmer, because playing a turd farmer isn't exactly a match for a "heroic fantasy" game. And nothing makes it harder to play 1st-level turd farmers. It's simple: [b]intentionally shaft your character[/b]. [/QUOTE]

Verification