Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6100715" data-attributes="member: 6696971">@<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?42582-pemerton" target="_blank">pemerton</a> has nailed down metagame mechanics in that excellent post above.  The reason why its broken out so much in this thread, I would say, is because the Warlord is the poster child for many of the metagame mechanics (anything that deviates from 100 % fealty to causal logic or expects at least some mental interfacing with "extra-gameworld" considerations) that people impugned 4e for; martial forced movement (not as much as CaGI but its there), martial healing by way of inspiration/invigoration that forces people to get up front and comfy with the abstraction of "HP not as meat", PC-stance fluctuations outside of actor, perceptions of lapsed player agency etc.  These things, and many others, are the reasons that 4e is my preferred ruleset for the D&D experience I'm looking for.  Unsurprisingly, they're also the same things that have forced such controversy over the system and that we're always debating on here.  I mean, I suspect that the 4e warlord that I contrived a few pages back would cause many 4e detractors to cringe, while I think its relatively tame from a metagame perspective.By the way, great succession of posts.  Unable to xp you and didn't have anything to add so I diddn't comment.</blockquote>