Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 4390866" data-attributes="member: 48965">Forked from: <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showpost.php?postid=4390815" target="_blank"> My first 4E game... </a>You mistakenly think I don't understand the paradigm...that's wrong, I don't share your opinion of it.  Those are two very different things.  Your argument here is "if only I understood 4e", but that's not the problem, the problem is I don't agree with your view.Again with what I don't understand...really it's a little tiresome, how about evidence that I am looking at it wrong.  I'm not claiming you don't understand 3e so really what does this add to the discussion?  So in 3e a fighter could be numerous things...that included but were not limited to... "the heavy armored guy at the front of the battle trained to hold the line and be that guy that focuses attacks on you"...yet 4e is more diverse...uhm ok.Yet there are still alot of assumptions that go along with this archery <s>fighter</s> ranger that have nothing to do with me being a warrior that is a good archer.  My armor is limited,  I cannot  "hold a line by tossing my bow aside and fighting hand to hand" (don't have the HP's/AC/ to do this), In taking the Ranger class I make the decision to be a striker which means I dart around, strike and move away.  I can do some damage but I can't go toe to toe with a bruiser.  However in 3e I could make a warrior who was good in archery and could hold a line in melee.  In 4e it's either or. Again with the Ranger (what is this class...the cure all).  Seriously though, With the above <s>Ranger</s> Thief ...Where is my sneak attack?   My Streetwise skill?  My Thievery skill?  My Insight skill so I don't get conned, and my  Bluff for lying?  Yeah with alot of wrangling and feats...you could get something similar to a pseudo-Rogue who uses a longsword effectively...but really is this easier than building a Rogue who uses a longsword effectively in 3e?Another question I wonder...is if it's so easy to sustitute these things, how can you claim the game doesn't feel homogeneous?  If I can just substitute a Ranger for Rogue...or Ranger for a Fighter then there has to be a large amount of homogeneousness between classes...either that or you are misrepresenting how "easy" it is to create the character you want through substituting another class to gain a particular ability.  I mean how is it that both of these things can be true (no snark, I'm genuinely curious)?Yet multi-classing in 3e gave you access to any powers or skills another class had.  Feats allowed you to customize on a smaller level...such as the Rogue who just wants to use a longsword effectively.Yeah I guess I'm not understanding...or maybe I feel you are misrepresenting eithera.) The fact that almost any class can be substituted for another if you want a particular ability in 4e.orb.) The classes are not homogeneous in feel or operation (Yet a Ranger is just a Rogue who can use longswords... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f615.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":confused:" title="Confused    :confused:"  data-smilie="5"data-shortname=":confused:" />)Who claimed 3e as a whole was a "gritty simulation", where did I say this?All I'm going to say on the Orc thing is, there was never a single Orc who could kill Gandalf, Aragorn, Gimli, or Legolas in a one on oen fight, so neither 4e or 3e models LotR well.  But then it's D&D and there is already a LotR rpg out there.I love how people who have not possibly played 4e from 1st to 30th level claim it scales better.  Sounds like you're just repeating marketing blurbs to me.  I'm not claiming it doesn't but really have you experienced this yet?Again with the statements about what I seem to know or not know because I don't agree with you.  Ok then...  I'm glad you feel that way about 4e but you just don't understand 3e as well as I do... If you would just accept a paradigm where wanting a minor tweak to a character doesn't necessitate changing all the abilities I like in that class to those of another, then you would realize just how flexible 3e is and how inflexible 4e is.  I mean honestly you sound like a person who never had a good grasp of the intricacies of 3rd edition.See how easy that was...but it doesn't really prove anything does it?</blockquote>

Verification