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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jgbrowning" data-source="post: 5053884" data-attributes="member: 5724">For the same reason a 4e rogue wastes time ferreting out a lead when anyone now in 4e can consult mystic sages, consult oracle, detect secret doors, comprehend languages, view location, or wizard's sight... etc...The group as a whole is more effective outside combat due the ritual system than previously. Saying that increasing the effectiveness of the group (now they call all be like wizards) increases the effectiveness of a single member (the rogue in your example) of the group doesn't necessarily follow.If the rogue doesn't have those rituals, he's actually more likely to be made ineffectual because the other members of the group are more likely to have the ability to do so. Unlike in 3e where there would be a greater chance of the spellcasters simply not having those spells.The issue, IMO, is one that wizards APPEARED to be able to do everything that everyone else could do, but in reality they weren't everything to everyone all the time and were commonly resources that could be more frail than overpowering. IMO, 4e's taking the tact that everyone should be able to do much of what only particular classes could do before.And now that more people can do the same things, is the creativity of the group just as limited or more limited? I think you may be mixing up the feeling of individual effectiveness in the game with the capability of the group as a whole. They're interconnected, IMO, but are distinctive design issues.joe b.</blockquote>

Verification