Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Storm Raven" data-source="post: 4287346" data-attributes="member: 307">I think you have accidentally hit on one of the main reasons some people (including me) react negatively to 4e. Pretty much each edition of D&amp;D since OD&amp;D has seen an increase in flexibility and an opening of options. In OD&amp;D, halflings and dwarves were all fighters, elves were all fighter/magic-users and so on. In 1e you had race based class restrictions and low race based class level limits. In 1e UA, you saw an expansion in options and a raising of those race based limits. In 2e you saw an even wider range of options, and a further raising of the race based level limits. In 3e, you saw the elimination of race based class and level limits, and a very open multiclassing system.And in 4e, it feels like a lot of restrictions have been put back into the game. I don't want to have to &quot;overthow&quot; restrictions in a new edition of the game. I wanted the system to continue along the path it had taken for the last 30 years - less restrictions, fewer hard coded roles, more flexibility in character design and development, and so on. Instead, we have a system that tries to pigeonhole characters as &quot;strikers&quot;, &quot;controllers&quot;, &quot;defenders&quot;, and &quot;leaders&quot;. It just feels like the game has gone backwards.To me, it seems like the 4e team said &quot;you got a lot of flexibility in 3e, but you didn't use it right, so we are going to protect you from your ability to choose and make choices for you so you will have more 'fun' when you play.&quot; My response is simply &quot;no thanks.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Storm Raven, post: 4287346, member: 307"] I think you have accidentally hit on one of the main reasons some people (including me) react negatively to 4e. Pretty much each edition of D&D since OD&D has seen an increase in flexibility and an opening of options. In OD&D, halflings and dwarves were all fighters, elves were all fighter/magic-users and so on. In 1e you had race based class restrictions and low race based class level limits. In 1e UA, you saw an expansion in options and a raising of those race based limits. In 2e you saw an even wider range of options, and a further raising of the race based level limits. In 3e, you saw the elimination of race based class and level limits, and a very open multiclassing system. And in 4e, it feels like a lot of restrictions have been put back into the game. I don't want to have to "overthow" restrictions in a new edition of the game. I wanted the system to continue along the path it had taken for the last 30 years - less restrictions, fewer hard coded roles, more flexibility in character design and development, and so on. Instead, we have a system that tries to pigeonhole characters as "strikers", "controllers", "defenders", and "leaders". It just feels like the game has gone backwards. To me, it seems like the 4e team said "you got a lot of flexibility in 3e, but you didn't use it right, so we are going to protect you from your ability to choose and make choices for you so you will have more 'fun' when you play." My response is simply "no thanks." [/QUOTE]

Verification