Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How Can D&D Next Win You Over?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 5983779" data-attributes="member: 996"><p>This statement is false. </p><p></p><p>No class can do that by itself. </p><p></p><p>In the context of pre-Essentials 4e, the structure of the game gives everyone limited-use powers, both daily and encounter. It also gives all characters at-will powers, and, as you well know, also allows for improvisation (the infamous page 42). While a player who willfully chooses not use encounter and daily powers will be less effective, overall, than one who avails himself of those resources, the concentration of PC effectiveness in dailies is much less in 4e than it was in 3e and earlier games. So playing an early-4e fighter and eschewing dailies as a stylistic choice is not /as/ sub-optimal as simply failing to play a tier-1 caster in 3.x was. If the greater effectiveness of a fighter using dailies compared to one not doing so could be said to 'suppress' the latter, then the existence of the tier-1 classes in 3e could be said to 'suppress' all other classes in the same way and to a greater degree.</p><p></p><p>In the context of post-Essentials, the Fighter class includes a Slayer and Knight that do not have daily powers, at all.</p><p></p><p><strong>Most importantly, in the actual context of this thread (and forum), in the context of 5e, having limited-use options for the fighter, even if they were similar to 4e's AEDU, would in no way prevent having other, unlimited-use options.</strong> </p><p></p><p>That is correct, the imbalanced classes in 3e were the casters. The 3e fighter was an elegantly-designed, customizeable, robustly-balanced class. A veritable paragon of game design. It was just unable to retain relevance in the face of the very badly balanced 3.x version of the traditional Vancian casters. </p><p></p><p>Actually, it was part of 3e, which was not nearly so well-balanced nor smooth to run as 4e. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /> But, it was certainly one of the better bits of design in 3.x, along with the innovative but not-quite-fully-realized 'modular multi-classing' that it introduced, no doubt about that. If the 3e fighter, rather than daily-oriented caster, had been used as an inspiration for 4e's common advancement structure, 4e might have turned out even better.</p><p></p><p>That's a moot line of speculation, though, as 5e has abandoned the concept of common advancement and the benefits thereof. </p><p></p><p>There's no way to know the exact numbers. For instance, at conventions I attended during 4e's run, LFR and Pathfinder games were studiedly equal in number (as if they were scheduling with that intent, in fact), and other scheduled D&D game ran about half 4e and half all others (including Pathfinder). Post-essentials, LFR imploded at my local conventions, and 4e dropped off in other venues, and games explicitly tagged as 'Essentials' never really appeared.</p><p></p><p>But the assertion that 4e represents some ignore-able, tiny minority is flatly absurd.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 5983779, member: 996"] This statement is false. No class can do that by itself. In the context of pre-Essentials 4e, the structure of the game gives everyone limited-use powers, both daily and encounter. It also gives all characters at-will powers, and, as you well know, also allows for improvisation (the infamous page 42). While a player who willfully chooses not use encounter and daily powers will be less effective, overall, than one who avails himself of those resources, the concentration of PC effectiveness in dailies is much less in 4e than it was in 3e and earlier games. So playing an early-4e fighter and eschewing dailies as a stylistic choice is not /as/ sub-optimal as simply failing to play a tier-1 caster in 3.x was. If the greater effectiveness of a fighter using dailies compared to one not doing so could be said to 'suppress' the latter, then the existence of the tier-1 classes in 3e could be said to 'suppress' all other classes in the same way and to a greater degree. In the context of post-Essentials, the Fighter class includes a Slayer and Knight that do not have daily powers, at all. [b]Most importantly, in the actual context of this thread (and forum), in the context of 5e, having limited-use options for the fighter, even if they were similar to 4e's AEDU, would in no way prevent having other, unlimited-use options.[/b] That is correct, the imbalanced classes in 3e were the casters. The 3e fighter was an elegantly-designed, customizeable, robustly-balanced class. A veritable paragon of game design. It was just unable to retain relevance in the face of the very badly balanced 3.x version of the traditional Vancian casters. Actually, it was part of 3e, which was not nearly so well-balanced nor smooth to run as 4e. ;) But, it was certainly one of the better bits of design in 3.x, along with the innovative but not-quite-fully-realized 'modular multi-classing' that it introduced, no doubt about that. If the 3e fighter, rather than daily-oriented caster, had been used as an inspiration for 4e's common advancement structure, 4e might have turned out even better. That's a moot line of speculation, though, as 5e has abandoned the concept of common advancement and the benefits thereof. There's no way to know the exact numbers. For instance, at conventions I attended during 4e's run, LFR and Pathfinder games were studiedly equal in number (as if they were scheduling with that intent, in fact), and other scheduled D&D game ran about half 4e and half all others (including Pathfinder). Post-essentials, LFR imploded at my local conventions, and 4e dropped off in other venues, and games explicitly tagged as 'Essentials' never really appeared. But the assertion that 4e represents some ignore-able, tiny minority is flatly absurd. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How Can D&D Next Win You Over?
Top