Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Shiroiken" data-source="post: 8945030" data-attributes="member: 6775477">I thought 4E was a more or less fine game, I just felt it was too different from prior versions of D&D. If it was released under a different name, I feel it wouldn't have had many issues at all. <ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Combat took forever and a day, because every combat had to be "meaningful." My experience was 2 hours was the norm, and every combat felt the same. Monsters came on strong, but then the party would eventually overwhelm them with daily and encounter powers.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Skill Challenges were a failure. Either you forced characters to get involved, even when it didn't make sense (early part of the edition) or a single specialized character could solve the problem (later part of the edition). <ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The concept could be reworked to use Clocks like Blades in the Dark, where you need a number of successes before time runs out. A single character couldn't get it done in time, and the constraint would encourage non-specialists to participate.</li> </ol></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Some things just didn't make sense when applied universally, most notably "Come and Get It" power, which would force ranged attackers to move into melee because reasons. DMG gave the impression the DM is just supposed to roll with it, making up whatever reason they could. Logic was irrelevant, only game balance.</li> </ol></blockquote>

Verification