Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5523282" data-attributes="member: 82106">Sure it is. The players in my game really could care less about mechanics, they have a story to participate in. When they want to do something they say &quot;I want to do X&quot; and they do X, and then mechanics come into play. Those could be using a power, a stunt, making a skill check, passing an SC, or whatever. The rules aren't any more dissociated from fluff than you make them be. Nor were the rules for 3.5 particularly adept at this either. All older style spell descriptions did was give casters license to find peculiar off-label uses for their spells, which 4e certainly allows as well with some checks or whatever the DM requires. Works fine.And here is where we begin to wonder what you have been doing with your 4e? I don't see a lot of ACTUAL PLAY similarity between the wizard and the fighter, sorry. Different power selections, class mechanics, options, etc make for characters with a great deal of variety. Right now in our group we have the following characters: A dwarf greatweapon fighter, an AoA swordmage, a STR cleric, a BS rogue, a starlock, and an orb wizard. They all play quite differently even though 4 of them are melee combatants. The dwarf wades into battle and ties up 2-3 of the enemy, the swordmage marks and engages annoying individual opponents and sticks to them via her aegis, the cleric does her healing thing and uses buffs and debuffs to weaken the enemy, the BS rogue dances around the edges of the fight avoiding a pounding while picking up CA and gutting enemies. The other 2 PCs meanwhile try to avoid getting into melee and do their stuff. Outside of combat the characters are as different as they want to be.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 5523282, member: 82106"] Sure it is. The players in my game really could care less about mechanics, they have a story to participate in. When they want to do something they say "I want to do X" and they do X, and then mechanics come into play. Those could be using a power, a stunt, making a skill check, passing an SC, or whatever. The rules aren't any more dissociated from fluff than you make them be. Nor were the rules for 3.5 particularly adept at this either. All older style spell descriptions did was give casters license to find peculiar off-label uses for their spells, which 4e certainly allows as well with some checks or whatever the DM requires. Works fine. And here is where we begin to wonder what you have been doing with your 4e? I don't see a lot of ACTUAL PLAY similarity between the wizard and the fighter, sorry. Different power selections, class mechanics, options, etc make for characters with a great deal of variety. Right now in our group we have the following characters: A dwarf greatweapon fighter, an AoA swordmage, a STR cleric, a BS rogue, a starlock, and an orb wizard. They all play quite differently even though 4 of them are melee combatants. The dwarf wades into battle and ties up 2-3 of the enemy, the swordmage marks and engages annoying individual opponents and sticks to them via her aegis, the cleric does her healing thing and uses buffs and debuffs to weaken the enemy, the BS rogue dances around the edges of the fight avoiding a pounding while picking up CA and gutting enemies. The other 2 PCs meanwhile try to avoid getting into melee and do their stuff. Outside of combat the characters are as different as they want to be. [/QUOTE]

Verification