Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5358385" data-attributes="member: 82106">It will be a bad thing if it turns existing players off of 4e, yes. People like me got back into the game because 4e had dropped all the silly arbitrary restrictions.That being said, I don't really have a problem with their being simply different types of paladin builds for different alignments all that much. The only issue I see there is if someone switches alignment then what? Still, I can live with that as long as there is some decent option for the group to decide what to do with. If the character becomes a 'blackguard' and gets slightly different powers, well we can go with that. We can ignore the whole rule if we want, so it certainly isn't a show stopper.What it DOES tell me though is that the primary design consideration that brought me into 4e is no longer considered to be all that important. I'm not so happy about that. It is fine with me if people use Essentials characters, but the more open-ended 4e options have to continue to be recognized as first class citizens of the game and I'd appreciate it if flexibility in character concept and development was kept in mind. It is all well and good for Mike to want to try to capture some sort of flavor of days of yore, but not all of us WANT it. We play too.</blockquote>