Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jay Verkuilen" data-source="post: 7751197" data-attributes="member: 6873517">Sure, though IMO WotC brought a lot of that on themselves by doing things like wholesale changing the cosmology and alignment systems as well as forcing every character to be a Vancian spellcaster in function. That really bugged the heck out of a lot of people I played with. "Wait, I'm a fighter but I have all these powers...?" It's not analogous, it is an example of social change. The multiple attacks and all the damage dice got annoying even if you precomputed things like Power Attack. I used color coded dice, which helped a ton, and that's something I continue to do---I wish other people would do the same. Kind of like wearing Dial. (Not the Dial, I'm totally allergic to it.)  Actually that was me, but at that point it was a very high level campaign and we were tracking buffs. Mostly though I don't recall needing to do that but it was very, very useful in 4E. Yeah, that certainly was the case but I tended to feel that every turn in 4E was like that, especially at higher levels. 4E ran smoothly and well at low levels. Exactly. A lot of the consolidation was good IMO. I long felt that 3.X was too granular in a lot of areas, particularly skills. A lot of people never seem to get out of that sophomore stage IMO. That and the fact that minis were assumed with all distances given in terms of squares. Bow ranges got quite small, for instance.  Yes, this is why I say that 4E made everybody a Vancian caster. Not literally but in terms of the rules, particularly in the original version pre-Essentials. So every character had that burden. Interrupts and attacks on a minor action were hell and often led to a "wait, whose turn is this, anyway?" I hated being in a party with a barbarian or a PHB2 bard. I tended to find that 4E monsters had too many hit points and not enough offense. I would frequently up their damage and cut their hit points to about 75%.</blockquote>

Verification