Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
d20 Modern 4E - I want it!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 4373452" data-attributes="member: 710"><p>That's a general "problem" where people never will see eye to eye. Some are perfectly willing to accept that parts of the game can single out characters from contributing. A Scientist has no place in combat, and a Soldier might be useless in a negotiations and investigation scenarios. </p><p>Shadowrun is a "modern" game that exemplifies this, really - If the mage is scouting astrally, the rest of the group sits back. If the decker is hacking the Matrix, the rest of the group sits back. In combat, Rigger, Street Samurai and Mage might be very busy, but Techies and Deckers will probably sit back.</p><p></p><p>Others say that it is game with multiple players and if not every player is contributing, this lessens the game experience. </p><p>D&D 4E takes this approach towards combat - every character has a combat role. You can't escape it. You can focus on combat or on non-combat stuff with a few abilities (mostly feats/skills), but you will never be bad at combat (by class design - player competence and tactical mastery still matter, of course). </p><p></p><p>I am personally leaning toward the latter aspect, too. I want every player to be engaged, and the best way to engage him is playing his character and having him contribute to any given situation. Of course, this limits the possible characters. You can't play just a "Scientist", you will be a scientist with martial arts or tactical understanding or the ability to tinker with weapons. You can't be a dumb gunslinger, you will also have to be a faceman, or a guide. </p><p>The pure scientist and the pure soldier is an NPC. He is not the protagonist of the story told in the game. At best, he's a side-kick.</p><p>(That's in fact how it works in many movies - there is a single protagonist that can do a lot of stuff, but sometimes he has side-kicks that can help him out in certain areas. Of course, in a RPG, would you want to play the side-kick if your friend plays the protagonist?</p><p></p><p>Maybe the solution to mixing both aspects - specialised and broad characters - is to give every character the option to have such side-kicks they can role-play in situations outside their expertise. So, if I am playing the afromentioned dumb Gunslinger, I have a private eye side-kick (a friend) that I can take over when the entire group is investigating a matter. (But how does this work if someone else is already playing an investigator-type character?)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mustrum_Ridcully, post: 4373452, member: 710"] That's a general "problem" where people never will see eye to eye. Some are perfectly willing to accept that parts of the game can single out characters from contributing. A Scientist has no place in combat, and a Soldier might be useless in a negotiations and investigation scenarios. Shadowrun is a "modern" game that exemplifies this, really - If the mage is scouting astrally, the rest of the group sits back. If the decker is hacking the Matrix, the rest of the group sits back. In combat, Rigger, Street Samurai and Mage might be very busy, but Techies and Deckers will probably sit back. Others say that it is game with multiple players and if not every player is contributing, this lessens the game experience. D&D 4E takes this approach towards combat - every character has a combat role. You can't escape it. You can focus on combat or on non-combat stuff with a few abilities (mostly feats/skills), but you will never be bad at combat (by class design - player competence and tactical mastery still matter, of course). I am personally leaning toward the latter aspect, too. I want every player to be engaged, and the best way to engage him is playing his character and having him contribute to any given situation. Of course, this limits the possible characters. You can't play just a "Scientist", you will be a scientist with martial arts or tactical understanding or the ability to tinker with weapons. You can't be a dumb gunslinger, you will also have to be a faceman, or a guide. The pure scientist and the pure soldier is an NPC. He is not the protagonist of the story told in the game. At best, he's a side-kick. (That's in fact how it works in many movies - there is a single protagonist that can do a lot of stuff, but sometimes he has side-kicks that can help him out in certain areas. Of course, in a RPG, would you want to play the side-kick if your friend plays the protagonist? Maybe the solution to mixing both aspects - specialised and broad characters - is to give every character the option to have such side-kicks they can role-play in situations outside their expertise. So, if I am playing the afromentioned dumb Gunslinger, I have a private eye side-kick (a friend) that I can take over when the entire group is investigating a matter. (But how does this work if someone else is already playing an investigator-type character?) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
d20 Modern 4E - I want it!
Top