Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 6047171" data-attributes="member: 7006">This is true.&nbsp; But you're missing that one important point in your statement.The specific mechanics you see that makes a class unique are not necessarily the same specific mechanics someone else sees that makes a class unique.And therein lies the problem.You might have very specific ideas on how the Fighter / Rogue / Cleric and Wizard should look when it comes to the mechanics used to illustrate and highlight how the class is.&nbsp; And 15% of the D&amp;D player population might agree with you.&nbsp; But those won't match the other 85% of the players out there.So what do you do?&nbsp; See an unchanging default to the game that only 15% of the population thinks is right?&nbsp; Or find the myriad of different mechanics you can use to illustrate and highlight how a class is... and then put into place the process for each player to use the ones they think best work.I mean... if some D&amp;D player out there thinks all four classes would be best served using a 'spell point' type of system for their abilities... who are we to say they are wrong?&nbsp; Or if Maneuvers can get tweaked to look like the AEDU powers and those are awesome for some person... what's wrong with that?Will either of those be the default or &quot;base&quot; game?&nbsp; Absolutely not.&nbsp; But why not see if the game's foundation can be designed so that any DM could reach those kind of goals if they so chose?To me... there is no reason not to think that you can design the game in such a way that you could then build a 4E lookalike from the building blocks within.&nbsp; Or a 3E lookalike game.&nbsp; Or 2E, or AD&amp;D.&nbsp; And isn't that what they've been saying was their hope all along?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 6047171, member: 7006"] This is true. But you're missing that one important point in your statement. The [I]specific[/I] mechanics you see that makes a class unique are not necessarily the [I]same[/I] specific mechanics someone else sees that makes a class unique. And therein lies the problem. You might have very specific ideas on how the Fighter / Rogue / Cleric and Wizard should look when it comes to the mechanics used to illustrate and highlight how the class is. And 15% of the D&D player population might agree with you. But those won't match the other 85% of the players out there. So what do you do? See an unchanging default to the game that only 15% of the population thinks is right? Or find the myriad of different mechanics you can use to illustrate and highlight how a class is... and then put into place the process for each player to use the ones they think best work. I mean... if some D&D player out there thinks all four classes would be best served using a 'spell point' type of system for their abilities... who are we to say they are wrong? Or if Maneuvers can get tweaked to look like the AEDU powers and those are awesome for some person... what's wrong with that? Will either of those be the default or "base" game? Absolutely not. But why not see if the game's foundation can be designed so that any DM could reach those kind of goals if they so chose? To me... there is no reason not to think that you can design the game in such a way that you could then build a 4E lookalike from the building blocks within. Or a 3E lookalike game. Or 2E, or AD&D. And isn't that what they've been saying was their hope all along? [/QUOTE]

Verification