Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Pickles JG" data-source="post: 5984059" data-attributes="member: 61501">If you use all of a 3.5 barbaria,n fighter or rogues abilities you will not be able to match the damage output, survivability &amp; &quot;strategic&quot; utility of a druid of 10th level or so who uses his own class abilities, wild shape, animal companion &amp; spells.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The players/dm could&nbsp; probably have balanced the druid but then we would not be playing the game we had spent all that money on. &nbsp;In the second game the Druid player never shows&nbsp; self restraint &amp; there was a suspicion he gained power in this game for letting the DM have a powerful character in a game he runs.&nbsp; In lovely balanced 4e he can't get away with this. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />&nbsp;I have deja vu from the same arguement over the new edition of Warhammer 40k.&nbsp; I still do not want to play it because it has too many vehicles I say. But it's not like that any more say my buddies but it is at the club I go to I rejoinder. A well they are all power gamers. I want the rules to police the game not the players. I play a fair bit of organised play &amp; table variation, fuzzy ruling &amp; just blatant loophole finding abuse is something I want to avoid. (&amp; was much better in 4e LFR than Living Greyhawk or Pathfinder.)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;As the focus of my ire, if you are going to change every damn' rule in a game why do you care what it is like in the first place?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Pickles JG, post: 5984059, member: 61501"] If you use all of a 3.5 barbaria,n fighter or rogues abilities you will not be able to match the damage output, survivability & "strategic" utility of a druid of 10th level or so who uses his own class abilities, wild shape, animal companion & spells. The players/dm could probably have balanced the druid but then we would not be playing the game we had spent all that money on. In the second game the Druid player never shows self restraint & there was a suspicion he gained power in this game for letting the DM have a powerful character in a game he runs. In lovely balanced 4e he can't get away with this. ;) I have deja vu from the same arguement over the new edition of Warhammer 40k. I still do not want to play it because it has too many vehicles I say. But it's not like that any more say my buddies but it is at the club I go to I rejoinder. A well they are all power gamers. I want the rules to police the game not the players. I play a fair bit of organised play & table variation, fuzzy ruling & just blatant loophole finding abuse is something I want to avoid. (& was much better in 4e LFR than Living Greyhawk or Pathfinder.) As the focus of my ire, if you are going to change every damn' rule in a game why do you care what it is like in the first place? [/QUOTE]

Verification