Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 5683304" data-attributes="member: 957">And this actually makes a point.&nbsp; IMO it still isn't really a significant point, but making a point is vastly better than just stating the glaringly obvious.I can't recall EVER not having the default party of &quot;fighter, cleric, thief, magic-user&quot;.&nbsp; That baseline was always there.&nbsp; That isn't remotely to say that everyone stuck to it or even expected that it would be stuck to.&nbsp; But parties were, in part, defined by how they differed from this baseline.&nbsp; The pure concept of roles has been around forever and there are much better and on point examples than strong guys in comics.&nbsp; But a key element of the topic comes down to how those roles are much more precisely defined, both conceptually and mathematically in 4E.&nbsp; I'm WAY outside the 4E is WOW camp, but there are points of commonality and if I wanted to make the &quot;they are the same&quot; devil's advocate argument, that would probably be right on the top of my list.&nbsp; The term &quot;roles&quot; fits very readily into any conversation about any D&amp;D edition.&nbsp; But the implementation and details of that term is very distinct for 4E.To use the fact that a purely superficial reference to the term applies as a means of passing off the iceberg of distinction beneath only contributes to misunderstanding of the issue.&nbsp; IMO</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BryonD, post: 5683304, member: 957"] And this actually makes a point. IMO it still isn't really a significant point, but making a point is vastly better than just stating the glaringly obvious. I can't recall EVER not having the default party of "fighter, cleric, thief, magic-user". That baseline was always there. That isn't remotely to say that everyone stuck to it or even expected that it would be stuck to. But parties were, in part, defined by how they differed from this baseline. The pure concept of roles has been around forever and there are much better and on point examples than strong guys in comics. But a key element of the topic comes down to how those roles are much more precisely defined, both conceptually and mathematically in 4E. I'm WAY outside the 4E is WOW camp, but there are points of commonality and if I wanted to make the "they are the same" devil's advocate argument, that would probably be right on the top of my list. The term "roles" fits very readily into any conversation about any D&D edition. But the implementation and details of that term is very distinct for 4E. To use the fact that a purely superficial reference to the term applies as a means of passing off the iceberg of distinction beneath only contributes to misunderstanding of the issue. IMO [/QUOTE]

Verification