Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 7822497" data-attributes="member: 29398">Actually, it objectively does if all other things are equal: BW is marked as superior in that it has the flexibility to handle something 4e cannot.  Both systems can happily deal with co-operative play but only BW can also deal with non-co-operative play.But, not knowing all the ins and outs of either system, I don't know if there's an area where 4e is objectively superior to BW in a similar way, which would tend to cancel out the BW advantage noted above.True; I'd rather find (or create) one system that could equally well provide both experiences.There's (at least) three different things here than can in theory be restricted.  PC race is one: fair game, the DM can restrict this to suit the setting*.  PC class is another: fair game, the DM can restrict this to suit the setting*.PC personality (or alignment, or characterization) is the third, and my position is that the DM has no right to restrict these unless that same restriction applies to all such characters in the setting. (e.g. if my PC Elf can't be evil then by extension there are no evil Elves in the setting; just like my PC Paladin has to be good because all Paladins in that setting are by definition good)* - or, in some cases, to suit the mechanics in order to prevent 'broken' builds in some systems.No Great Old Ones or alien races as PCs comes under PC race restrictions, which are fine.  But if I want to play an otherwise-allowable PC as a hidden evil cultist (or a spy for same, or a wannabe who is still trying to gain acceptance), where's the harm?  Sooner or later I either get found out or I don't, and I either succeed or I don't, or I have a change of heart, or whatever.  Won't know until it all plays out...</blockquote>

Verification