Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="vagabundo" data-source="post: 4875377" data-attributes="member: 55864">I've seens some less than optimal characters created for 4e and they can fall behind the curve. I think the issue here is whether the character is viable and I believe they are and could still contribute to combat.I don't think we would want a situation were it was impossible to build a poor character by making poor choices, but 4e is very transparent and does give good advice - if the players read it, which, I'm afraid to say my little sis didn't&nbsp; and created a fairly poor warlock. She just picked things that sounded cool to her and it didn't work together very well or work well with how she wanted to play it. So I created an archer ranger for her that suited what she wanted all the better. But - trust me - her 3e characters were much much worse. My brother had a similar issue with his Wizard character - this is someone who always played a fighter in previous editions. But I regiged a couple of things and changed out a few spells and feats, and he is chuffed now.These two examples where for early heroic tier, but in both cases they were viable characters, they just weren't run very well; tactically.All I believe 4e promised was that it would move away from the system mastery situation - with its hidden traps. And to my mind it does a damn fine job of it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="vagabundo, post: 4875377, member: 55864"] I've seens some less than optimal characters created for 4e and they can fall behind the curve. I think the issue here is whether the character is viable and I believe they are and could still contribute to combat. I don't think we would want a situation were it was impossible to build a poor character by making poor choices, but 4e is very transparent and does give good advice - if the players read it, which, I'm afraid to say my little sis didn't and created a fairly poor warlock. She just picked things that sounded cool to her and it didn't work together very well or work well with how she wanted to play it. So I created an archer ranger for her that suited what she wanted all the better. But - trust me - her 3e characters were much much worse. My brother had a similar issue with his Wizard character - this is someone who always played a fighter in previous editions. But I regiged a couple of things and changed out a few spells and feats, and he is chuffed now. These two examples where for early heroic tier, but in both cases they were viable characters, they just weren't run very well; tactically. All I believe 4e promised was that it would move away from the system mastery situation - with its hidden traps. And to my mind it does a damn fine job of it. [/QUOTE]

Verification