Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="fumetti" data-source="post: 5426215" data-attributes="member: 6667461">Yes and no.&nbsp; You're right that a lot of non-combat activity is well suited in other tomes.&nbsp; (And I *am* looking at this situation after seeing 20+ 4E hardbacks released without it.)&nbsp; But....1) Non-combat adventuring needs to be covered somewhat in the core books if WOTC intends for non-combat to be a &quot;core&quot; part of the game.&nbsp; Otherwise, the &quot;core&quot; of the game is combat and traditional roleplaying is just optional.2) Even if travel data, etc., is left for campaign guides, the powers themselves need non-combat language.&nbsp; Every power is written in combat terms.&nbsp; I see none that even give a hint that that power can be used in a non-combat situation.&nbsp; (Not even a passage elsewhere that suggests these powers have non-combat application.)&nbsp; This leaves much of roleplaying to be house-ruled.&nbsp; (And I don't like paying $$$ for rulebooks that effectively tell me to make the rules up myself.)Given the emphasis on appealing to new players, 4E is effectively teaching the next generation of players that DnD is more a tabletop strategy game with miniatures than a classic roleplaying game.&nbsp; Since I teach teenagers everyday, I can predict their statement:&nbsp; &quot;Wandering around adventuring isn't a part of DnD!&nbsp; DnD is all about the combat!&nbsp; It doesn't even mention any of that inbetween stuff.&quot;I have looked without success for a wandering monster table of any kind.&nbsp; It doesn't sound like much, but it shows a huge chunk of the game--adventuring--is now missing.&nbsp; How long does it take for a party to travel from town to the dungeon?&nbsp; No mention of this activity at all.&nbsp; All movement is described in combat situations, not basic traveling.&nbsp; There are many disconcerting examples of roleplaying being removed from 4E.&nbsp; And it bothers me.&nbsp; I don't want DnD to be turned into a lesser, one-dimensional game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="fumetti, post: 5426215, member: 6667461"] Yes and no. You're right that a lot of non-combat activity is well suited in other tomes. (And I *am* looking at this situation after seeing 20+ 4E hardbacks released without it.) But.... 1) Non-combat adventuring needs to be covered somewhat in the core books if WOTC intends for non-combat to be a "core" part of the game. Otherwise, the "core" of the game is combat and traditional roleplaying is just optional. 2) Even if travel data, etc., is left for campaign guides, the powers themselves need non-combat language. Every power is written in combat terms. I see none that even give a hint that that power can be used in a non-combat situation. (Not even a passage elsewhere that suggests these powers have non-combat application.) This leaves much of roleplaying to be house-ruled. (And I don't like paying $$$ for rulebooks that effectively tell me to make the rules up myself.) Given the emphasis on appealing to new players, 4E is effectively teaching the next generation of players that DnD is more a tabletop strategy game with miniatures than a classic roleplaying game. Since I teach teenagers everyday, I can predict their statement: "Wandering around adventuring isn't a part of DnD! DnD is all about the combat! It doesn't even mention any of that inbetween stuff." I have looked without success for a wandering monster table of any kind. It doesn't sound like much, but it shows a huge chunk of the game--adventuring--is now missing. How long does it take for a party to travel from town to the dungeon? No mention of this activity at all. All movement is described in combat situations, not basic traveling. There are many disconcerting examples of roleplaying being removed from 4E. And it bothers me. I don't want DnD to be turned into a lesser, one-dimensional game. [/QUOTE]

Verification