Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ashockney" data-source="post: 1995656" data-attributes="member: 1363">Dear Santa Claus...you're cracking me up, Universe!Amazingly, Reanjr I had almost the EXACT same solution on attacks.&nbsp; Expecially required at higher levels.&nbsp; I think this should definitely be the foudnation for 4E.&nbsp; In my verison you get minus 3, minus 6, and minus 8, and have to have double the BAB to get the iterative attacks.&nbsp; It's almost the exact same thing.&nbsp; I LOVE the idea of factoring in another set of actions into this basic, more elegant combat action system (ala Book of Iron Might), although I'm waiting for that book to come out in paperback to get a copy, and I haven't seen it at my local gamestore yet.&nbsp; I think in streamlining the combat action system, there is some advantage to a core system/subsystem, which would provide a reasonable amount of versatility, to provide a distinctive play experience between players, and when playing different characters.&nbsp; If you lose that, it becomes too much like Champs.&nbsp; Which, for as balanced, as a game system as that is, I can't get players to stick around in that game too long, because the play experience is simply not different enough between players, and as you grow/develop your character.&nbsp; Oversimplifying here could have some unintended negative consequences.Reanjr, thanks for the feedback on all the other items, it sounds like (at least structurally) of like mind on ways to improve 4E and make it more elegant, in the process.I'm intrigued by your comment on movement, as I've found the existing movement system, albeit a bit quantitative in resolving a chase scene.Anyone have an opposing view to any of these recommended changes?&nbsp; If so, why?&nbsp; Support a counter arguement to improve the future of our discussion and the foundation for 4E!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ashockney, post: 1995656, member: 1363"] Dear Santa Claus...you're cracking me up, Universe! Amazingly, Reanjr I had almost the EXACT same solution on attacks. Expecially required at higher levels. I think this should definitely be the foudnation for 4E. In my verison you get minus 3, minus 6, and minus 8, and have to have double the BAB to get the iterative attacks. It's almost the exact same thing. I LOVE the idea of factoring in another set of actions into this basic, more elegant combat action system (ala Book of Iron Might), although I'm waiting for that book to come out in paperback to get a copy, and I haven't seen it at my local gamestore yet. I think in streamlining the combat action system, there is some advantage to a core system/subsystem, which would provide a reasonable amount of versatility, to provide a distinctive play experience between players, and when playing different characters. If you lose that, it becomes too much like Champs. Which, for as balanced, as a game system as that is, I can't get players to stick around in that game too long, because the play experience is simply not different enough between players, and as you grow/develop your character. Oversimplifying here could have some unintended negative consequences. Reanjr, thanks for the feedback on all the other items, it sounds like (at least structurally) of like mind on ways to improve 4E and make it more elegant, in the process. I'm intrigued by your comment on movement, as I've found the existing movement system, albeit a bit quantitative in resolving a chase scene. Anyone have an opposing view to any of these recommended changes? If so, why? Support a counter arguement to improve the future of our discussion and the foundation for 4E! [/QUOTE]

Verification