Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 4669546" data-attributes="member: 2067">I wouldn't necessarily want combat-like social or exploration challenges, but what I would like are more detailed non-combat challenges where your archetype (your class or your "noncombat archetype") offers different options to use tactical and strategic rules to overcome the challenge.4e is clearly about combat, but I'd like the option to shift the detail to other things, too. That doesn't require mechanics quite like combat, but it does require a diversity of abilities that can contribute to various noncombat challenges. Earlier editions have this. 4e, with skill challenges and rituals, only supports this if you don't really care about it or if you're comfortable with abstract rules generally. Earlier editions, especially with the "toolbox" noncombat spells like divinations and enchantments, supported this better.A given episode of CSI will certainly show you how many tactics and challenges can be derived from something non-combat. Also see: A John Grisham novel, most horror movies, and real life.Combat is not the only place where meaningful tactical choice can take place, and 4e treats that as if it is the case more often than previous editions.Specifically, a lot of noncombat spells, and the access to these abilities varying with class, helped give each character something different to contribute. For instance, in the investigative challenge case, the Rogue might have underworld contacts, or could spy on the secret meeting. The Cleric could uncover imposters. The Wizard could charm the guards. The Fighter could apprehend the wrong-doer when she was uncovered.Skill challenges being open to almost any skill means that there is no difference between a character who chooses Diplomacy and someone who chooses Perception.Rituals are a little better, but even they are just there to be grabbed by anyone who wants them, meaning there's still no real difference in what two characters can contribute.There is little strategic dimension in earlier editions, and there is even less in 4e. ...look, obviously you're a fan. If you're unable or unwilling to accept that experiences differ and that people who hold other opinions can actually be valid in holding those opinions, and if you can't somehow engage in a conversation instead of spouting subjectivities that are clearly in dispute, I think we're pretty much done with whatever constructive results could have come from this conversation. You're intractable, and spouting about how ignorant and wrong I am certainly isn't going to convince me that you have anything worth contributing to my perspective.Saying "You're wrong, I'm right, you're ignorant, I'm well-learned," isn't a counterpoint, it's just contradiction. I feel like I've stepped into a Monty Python sketch. Go enjoy your game, no one is stopping you.</blockquote>

Verification