Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7749186" data-attributes="member: 42582">A related discussion came up in the &quot;worldbulding&quot; thread.I agree that a mechanically intricate game like 4e is hard for a &quot;casual&quot; player to get into and do well at. In the world of card games, I would compare bridge to five hundred in this respect. It's a virtue of 500 that it is possible for even a casual player to do passably well without following all the play and counting all the cards (the trump suit is longer; they can be led by a stronger partner; etc; and watch those casual players crumble when the bid is No Trumps!). But that isn't an argument that bridge is a bad game!EDIT: the champion analogue in 4e is the archer ranger, who does nothing but Twin Strike or the occasional Twin Strike variant as an encouner or daily power. I think it's probably a weakness, though, for this character to have been ranged rather than melee. Melee is, on the whole, more exciting. The flip side being that 4e melee can be pretty lethal if you're not a technically competent player. Which I guess just reinforces the point that 4e is not particularly friendly for the &quot;casual&quot; player.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7749186, member: 42582"] A related discussion came up in the "worldbulding" thread. I agree that a mechanically intricate game like 4e is hard for a "casual" player to get into and do well at. In the world of card games, I would compare bridge to five hundred in this respect. It's a virtue of 500 that it is possible for even a casual player to do passably well without following all the play and counting all the cards (the trump suit is longer; they can be led by a stronger partner; etc; and watch those casual players crumble when the bid is No Trumps!). But that isn't an argument that bridge is a bad game! EDIT: the champion analogue in 4e is the archer ranger, who does nothing but Twin Strike or the occasional Twin Strike variant as an encouner or daily power. I think it's probably a weakness, though, for this character to have been ranged rather than melee. Melee is, on the whole, more exciting. The flip side being that 4e melee can be pretty lethal if you're not a technically competent player. Which I guess just reinforces the point that 4e is not particularly friendly for the "casual" player. [/QUOTE]

Verification