Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ProfessorPain" data-source="post: 4670890" data-attributes="member: 82012">Multiclassing always played a huge role in my campaigns and in the characters I made (both as a GM and as a player). Class dipping was fun, and I enjoyed it alot. Yes, system mastery was important. And without it, you were at a disadvantage, which could be a problem. I thought the intention of 4E was to fix that, but retain the full range of multiclassing. Which is why I was dissapointed. Instead they went the other way completley, and some people like it. But I feel like my choices don't matter. No matter what character I build, it feels like it is designed to make everyone equal no matter what. I understand some people enjoy this. But for me, it just isn't my game. 4E just doesn't get me excited. That doesn't mean it is an objectively bad system, any more than it means 3E is objectively good. They perform different functions. 4E is tight and balanced. 3E is a little chaotic, but its great if you like lots of choices and variety in power levels when building a character. It also had a very loose multiclassing system. Which made it very easy to realize character concepts. I know many have pointed out you can build anything in 4E, but I have found it is much harder to do so. &nbsp;The fun, for me, of 3E was using multiclassing to create characters that really excelled at something specific or had a unique niche. And you did that by multiclassing. It didn't have to be about power either.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ProfessorPain, post: 4670890, member: 82012"] Multiclassing always played a huge role in my campaigns and in the characters I made (both as a GM and as a player). Class dipping was fun, and I enjoyed it alot. Yes, system mastery was important. And without it, you were at a disadvantage, which could be a problem. I thought the intention of 4E was to fix that, but retain the full range of multiclassing. Which is why I was dissapointed. Instead they went the other way completley, and some people like it. But I feel like my choices don't matter. No matter what character I build, it feels like it is designed to make everyone equal no matter what. I understand some people enjoy this. But for me, it just isn't my game. 4E just doesn't get me excited. That doesn't mean it is an objectively bad system, any more than it means 3E is objectively good. They perform different functions. 4E is tight and balanced. 3E is a little chaotic, but its great if you like lots of choices and variety in power levels when building a character. It also had a very loose multiclassing system. Which made it very easy to realize character concepts. I know many have pointed out you can build anything in 4E, but I have found it is much harder to do so. The fun, for me, of 3E was using multiclassing to create characters that really excelled at something specific or had a unique niche. And you did that by multiclassing. It didn't have to be about power either. [/QUOTE]

Verification