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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lord Zardoz" data-source="post: 4473766" data-attributes="member: 704">I think that one of the great things that 4th edition has done is to keep the the combat elements of each class balanced against the combat elements of other classes.  This in turn should have one clear result.  It will allow someone to create a gambling womanizer of any class since the non combat skills of each class are largely independent of the combat elements.If you want to have a Gambling Womanizer, in most editions of D&D, you go for a Rogue.  In 4th, you can do so much easier, though it may cost some feats to make a skill trainable.Getting more directly on topic here, the rules can have some very direct effects on game play.  If the rules are absent for something, it falls to DM Fiat, and if the DM decides a given action should not succeed for reasons of plot convenience, than the player has no recourse.  This means that a player may end up trying something exactly once, and if the DM makes it clear he does not like the implications, he will not be able to try it again.If the rules do have rules for handling a given action, it greatly increases the chances that the players will take actions of plot significance which may not be predictable.  Its easier to create someone who intends to be the worlds greatest swordsmen if there are feats and powers that build on that concept.  It is easier to create a cat burglar who can sneak into any building and pick any lock if there are rules for lock picking and climbing.  Gamers tend to build their characters primarily around what they are able to do.  That informs every other aspect of the character.END COMMUNICATION</blockquote>

Verification