Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Wolfwood2" data-source="post: 4309507" data-attributes="member: 39394">The logical response is, if you're getting to the same end then why complicate the game with multiple paths to get there?&nbsp; The 4E assumption is that game mechanics are completely invisible in the game world.&nbsp; If you want your character to be a great archer, then the game only needs to give you one way to be a great archer.&nbsp; If you want your character to be a fast-talking charmer, then the game should provide a direct path to being a fast-talking charmer, not make you try to figure out the best way to get there of multiple methods.You keep talking about a &quot;range of options&quot;, but do those options really look that different when viewed from an in-game perspective?&nbsp; Is a bard/monk really going to look any different in-game from a rogue with powers focused on movement, the appropriate skills, and the ability to cast a little magic?It's true that you can't make a dedicated non-combat character by sacrificing all combat ability, but look at it the other way around.&nbsp; Players who do want their PC to be able to fight don't have to put up with being completely outshined by the non-combat character in all non-combat situations.&nbsp; 4E is predicated on the idea that everybody has something to contribute in all situations, whether combat or non-combat.No longer do you get the half-orc barbarian with maxed out ranks in Climb and no other skills.&nbsp; Stat mod + half-level for all rolls and a minimum number of trained skills means that even a player who has concentrated his character on being a combat monster will be able to participate in the non-combat portions of the gaming session.&nbsp; How is that not good for roleplaying and problem-solving?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Wolfwood2, post: 4309507, member: 39394"] The logical response is, if you're getting to the same end then why complicate the game with multiple paths to get there? The 4E assumption is that game mechanics are completely invisible in the game world. If you want your character to be a great archer, then the game only needs to give you one way to be a great archer. If you want your character to be a fast-talking charmer, then the game should provide a direct path to being a fast-talking charmer, not make you try to figure out the best way to get there of multiple methods. You keep talking about a "range of options", but do those options really look that different when viewed from an in-game perspective? Is a bard/monk really going to look any different in-game from a rogue with powers focused on movement, the appropriate skills, and the ability to cast a little magic? It's true that you can't make a dedicated non-combat character by sacrificing all combat ability, but look at it the other way around. Players who do want their PC to be able to fight don't have to put up with being completely outshined by the non-combat character in all non-combat situations. 4E is predicated on the idea that everybody has something to contribute in all situations, whether combat or non-combat. No longer do you get the half-orc barbarian with maxed out ranks in Climb and no other skills. Stat mod + half-level for all rolls and a minimum number of trained skills means that even a player who has concentrated his character on being a combat monster will be able to participate in the non-combat portions of the gaming session. How is that not good for roleplaying and problem-solving? [/QUOTE]

Verification