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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pawsplay" data-source="post: 4541165" data-attributes="member: 15538">Ok, fair warning. This is a fairly cynical post. So, with 4e, they decided to streamline things, silo classes into their archetypes, and try to balance everything. They also created an explosion of individual powers for every class. Some classes got more powers, others ended up with less. There are plenty of advanteges to the approach they took.But there is a glaring weakness. It isn't very easy to improvise a new class, and each class is pretty limited in what it does well. Multiclassing sometimes works well, but other times, it just doesn't do anything.Now, the easiest way to address this problem is to publish. More paths, more powers, a couple of new classes. Every gap is now a potential new area for published material. Which, by the way, costs money, either in terms of a Dragon subscription or in the way of a new book.So where does that leave us? Let's say you played and enjoyed an Eldritch Knight in D&D 3.5. Well, in 4e, you can choose to A) suck worse than a poorly planned 3.0 fighter/wizard, by taking less than exciting multiclass choicesB) lose your character's basic flavor, by taking somewhat more effective multiclass choicesC) play something elseD) pay moneyNow, there's no question that fencers, fighter-mages, lightly armored fighters and the like benefitted a lot from the 3.5 splatbooks. But even with just core, they're viable. Perhaps not ideal, but in their own niche, as good as anything else. Not so with 4e.Much like Rifts, you have to pay to play. Sourcebook after sourcebook, slowly giving you the options you need to play the character you want, or giving you the upgrades you need to compete with the other PCs. It reminds me of the darkest days of AD&D 2e, when TSR began publishing a splatbook for every class and every race, full of "kits." In addition to the power ups to be found, these kits more often than not simply allowed you to do something you wanted to before but found strenuous under the class system. Now, I can think of precious few AD&D 2e characters, kit or no, who can't be translated into 3.5 terms, usually with just core. But 4e? Forget about it. I quit playing AD&D around when Powers & Skills came out. While some have made comparisons between 4e and the earliest editions, 4e reminds me strikingly of AD&D 2.5. Only this time, born as what it will be, with built-in incompleteness. Dare I say it, collectability?In the long run, 4e may end up costing similarly to what 3.5 cost to many collectors. But it's clear it was designed with returning revenue in mind. Online subscriptions. Classes forever in need of expansion. Old options excised and then reintroduced. With 3.5 I felt like a I had a choice; very rarely did an option in a new book presuppose something in another. Toward the very end, I saw just the beginnings of "new core" with new Invocations and such showing up in each book. But never so much it crowded out what I could use. I cherry-picked from the very beginning, and I never felt left out. Sure, I didn't have the Dragon Slayer with its full BAB and two good saves and caster progression at 1st level, but so what? I didn't need it, and if someone referenced it online, it didn't take much to fill me in. While I am sure the new D&D was designed with lofty game play goals in mind, I do not hesitate to suggest it was designed with certain financial goals in mind, too. Now, I am one for good business, but I would never deliberately attempt to make my customers pay more for less value, and that's what I feel is being sold here.</blockquote>

Verification