Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Immortal Sun" data-source="post: 7563782">I generally agree that 4E gave you a sense of of the purpose of your character right there in the abilities.&nbsp; That certainly aids role-playing in some regards, but it also limits it.&nbsp; In other editions, the things you do were less right there in the abilities and more in how you put them to use.&nbsp; These approaches have appeal and work for different people.&nbsp; I like 4E in that the combat play reinforces the decisions you make during character creation.&nbsp; It can help keep you &quot;on the path&quot; of a certain type of play and a certain sort of roleplay.On the other hand, other editions give you &quot;pieces&quot; and a note saying &quot;some assembly required&quot; and nothing more.&nbsp; This approach requires the player to keep themselves on track and focused on the style of play and sort of character they want to roleplay.&nbsp; Some people are better at this approach, some people aren't.&nbsp; This approach certainly requires more work and some people find that more enjoyable but some people see it more as work and some character concepts are harder to make work than others.4E supported an awful lot of character concepts, and with their hybrid system, there were a nearly infinite number of combinations.&nbsp; As well every class had a variety of powers that could allow one to express a number of character concepts.&nbsp; But this design also limited players who wanted a more &quot;bake from scratch&quot; sort of approach.&nbsp; And it can be just as frustrating to not be able to express your character concept in this edition because the pieces don't exist, as it is to attempt to express your concept from the raw elements.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Immortal Sun, post: 7563782"] I generally agree that 4E gave you a sense of of the purpose of your character right there in the abilities. That certainly aids role-playing in some regards, but it also limits it. In other editions, the things you do were less [I]right there[/I] in the abilities and more in how you put them to use. These approaches have appeal and work for different people. I like 4E in that the combat play reinforces the decisions you make during character creation. It can help keep you "on the path" of a certain type of play and a certain sort of roleplay. On the other hand, other editions give you "pieces" and a note saying "some assembly required" and nothing more. This approach requires the player to keep themselves on track and focused on the style of play and sort of character they want to roleplay. Some people are better at this approach, some people aren't. This approach certainly requires more work and some people find that more enjoyable but some people see it more as work and some character concepts are harder to make work than others. 4E supported an awful lot of character concepts, and with their hybrid system, there were a nearly infinite number of combinations. As well every class had a variety of powers that could allow one to express a number of character concepts. But this design also limited players who wanted a more "bake from scratch" sort of approach. And it can be just as frustrating to not be able to express your character concept in this edition because the pieces don't exist, as it is to attempt to express your concept from the raw elements. [/QUOTE]

Verification