Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5525707" data-attributes="member: 42582">Sorry, I didn't mean that, nor mean to imply it in such strong terms. But I did want to disagree with you (hopefully not in too combative a way). I think my disagreement is more along these lines, which I hope don't characterise your view as unfairly: I don't feel that 4e's tactical rules get in the way of the fiction in the sort of way I take you to be suggesting. And often I feel that they facilitate the fiction.I'm in two minds about this. Sometimes I agree that this is true, and that it would be better to have common pools of powers, which different classes then gave access to. On the other hand, in practice it's my players rather than me as a GM who have to manage the power bloat - I only have to know the powers on their sheets, and most of the time it's clear what's going on when they use the power. (If something looks weird to me, especially when it's one of my players who I know is weaker on the rules minutiae, I'll get them to show me the power description.)Thanks - I got the idea from the "Rule of the Ming Vase" in the oldschool primer (link to that, and also the recap is <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/299440-exploration-scenarios-my-experiment-last-sunday.html" target="_blank">here</a>). I don't myself agree with your last sentence, because I think page 42 pushes in the other direction. But I can see where you're coming from. I think it really depends heavily on how central you think page 42 (understood broadly and richly) is to the game. And I definitely agree that the guidelines could be better.My party has a sorcerer and ranger, and a paladin and defender, and I still feel the differences. But I certainly haven't seen the full range of classes played. Maybe there is sameiness that I haven't encountered yet. Or maybe my threshhold for sameiness is higher - I think playing a lot of Rolemaster, where classes are often different only in rather narrow ways, might have that effect.</blockquote>

Verification