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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 5650245" data-attributes="member: 87792">And fewer options per decision point.  It's options per decision point where analysis paralysis kicks in.  Only if you don't understand how things work in actual play and are using strictly armchair analysis of the essentials classes.  "I hit him."  That is all you need to do.  Because you are in exactly the same stance as you were last turn. Zero - except for a default option provided by the book.  And of being able to say "I hit him".  And of not wasting your powers - you Power Attack after the attack, and you don't have dailies for the stance-classes.  However you slice it, playing woefully sub par and knowing you are doing so is not the same as playing very slightly sub par.  Except that it wasn't a debacle except in the minds of a few people, and there's a genuine difference between what was done and what was proposed.  I don't get much more out of them than you do- but they aren't aimed at you or me.  And I roleplay in part to put my head into the heads of others.  Once more you demonstrate that you do not know what you are talking about.  PA is a simple yes/no after the roll.  I have never seen anyone locked into analysis paralysis by that.  And nine times out of ten you aren't making a decision.  You are leaving the stance exactly where it was.  And not spending an action.  Spurious objection.  And misunderstanding of analysis.  I'm currently DMing two campaigns - one for eighteen months (that is currently Paragon) and one for almost a year.  I'm also playing in three.  In the campaigns I'm DMing, with some players (two in one campaign, one in the other) I've noticed a significant improvement in their play experience when they were using essentials classes.  With others it doesn't make the blindest bit of difference (I'm in this category) - and with still others it would be a negative.  I'm guessing that it would be a negative with you.  Well guess what?  You don't have to use those classes. What experience do you have (if any) seeing Essentials classes in actual play?  Not normally for the type of people who want to play Slayers IME.  Pick a stance, leave it there, and say "I hit him."  Not ideal play - but not far off the pace (unlike the equivalent from pre-essentials classes).  "Is there a good reason to change stance?"  Completely different.  And "Which of these two at wills, four encounters, and handful of dailies?"  The classes in question have different standards  Not really.  The extra tricks are useful, but Tactical Trick is a workhorse.  Two of them (Sneak's and Acrobat's) IME have at least as much use out of combat as in it.  I've watched my pregen hunter do exactly the same TS, TS, TS (after freezing a bad guy out of the fight) and he wasn't missing a significant chunk of his class's power by doing so.  Disruptive Strike and Fox's Retreat add a lot of damage but the latter takes planning.  As for spamming riposte strike when flanking, that just leaves you dangling.  Rogues who do that IME get squished.  And the foe escaping the flank (while the Thief has a trick to keep them in place).  But the thief doesn't need to flank for Tactical Trick to give CA.  They just need to be attacking the focus fire target.</blockquote>

Verification