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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="N0Man" data-source="post: 5050577" data-attributes="member: 64066">I do want to add, that there are a few things that bug me about 4E... though it's not really 4E's fault.The Combat powers work so well and are so interesting that many people get caught up in the combats and forget the game has a lot more to offer.Too many players in 4E seem to get too caught up in the character sheet, and their lists of skills, powers, and abilities and forget about doing things that aren't on the sheet.  Frankly though, I've found many players have done this in every edition.Too many DM's run sloppy skill challenges and treat the usable skills as a to-do list that either they read to the players they can try (with no reason how they apply to the situation) or just let players call out skills (again without saying how they are using the skill).  Skill challenges can be run well, but I think they are greatly misunderstood or misused.I often find that there's so much edition hatred and bias on the internet that goes on that it's often hard to get players to come into a new game with a fresh unbiased outlook.  I've found that almost every new player coming in that came into my games with those biases ended up playing their character in ways that just reinforced those biases (and I don't even think they intend or realize it).On the other hand, I've loved playing 4E with people who were clueless about it, didn't know about the debates and edition wars, and often who never even played D&D before.  Many of these players were fun, adventurous, and sometimes more creative than the standard player.  Since they didn't know about the supposed limits of 4E, they didn't have any reason to hesitate to go past them. ;-)Also, not enough players really have taken to heart how much 4E promotes reskinning, refluffing, substitution, improvising, and trying to make the game your own.  There's a lot more power and depth in 4E than many give it credit for.  It has it's weaknesses (for example, if you want to be a character specializing in disarming your opponent, or if you want to just play a simple crafter (which really is a poor fit for D&D adventures anyway) but it still has a lot of power.I also want to add, before 4E, I never wanted to DM, but now I think it's lots of fun.  I never wanted to play a healer (Cleric) before 4E, but Leaders in 4E are great.  Also, before 4E, Warriors bored me completely, but I wouldn't mind playing them now.  I find that overall, they've done a good job of making all classes fun.Now I admit that spell casters are a trade off.  Casters can do more at level 1 than ever before, and don't ever completely run out of spells, and those are great things.  However, they'll never get the ridiculous ton of spells they can memorize per day like in previous editions.However, I still think it's better for the health of the game.  It gives more classes a chance in the spotlight instead of just being sidekicks to the wizard.  Spells are less likely to completely overshadow and invalidate skill based classes (though with extra costs of time and money, many Rituals still exist for a pinch).  It also reduces prep time for wizards every rest, trying to decide what they want to memorize (that is if they don't just memorize the same list every day anyway, effectively nullifying the advantage to their great selection).Trust me, I had misgivings about casters too, but after much thought, I reluctantly had to admit that it made for a more balanced, more team-oriented, and more manageable game.</blockquote>

Verification