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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 5634370" data-attributes="member: 957">I agree that this can be the case.As was just referenced in this thread, there have been numerous debates about whether or not 4E is the same as prior editions of the game.  Clearly a large number of people feel that it is.  But also clearly a large number of people feel that it is not.  That is because the style of play that was supported by prior editions of the game was much more flexible.  If the style of play someone choose for prior editions was consistent with the style embraced by 4E, then not only will you not see a difference, but you will also probably find the experience improved because the design focus is right where you want it.But there is nothing in the 3E mechanics which mandate these patterns.I could design a lesser kind of dragon with a breath weapon only useable once per day.  I've just created a mechanically mandated pattern on what will happen with this 3E creature.  It has a daily.  But, this only happens because when I conceived of the idea of the monster this way, the concept of the creature controls the mechanics so that during play the mechanics will have the story work "right".  Before you ever decide the first element of a 4E character the fact that it will have dailies is known.  Your concept is then adapted to fit with these mechanical prerequisites.  Can that be done satisfactorily?  Yes.  Absolutely.  At the end of the day it is about imagination and working with it.  I absolutely could get past this and have a blast playing 4E.  BUT, a system that doesn't have this requirement is even better.The quasi-Vancian magic system could certainly be pointed out as an example of imposed pattern in 3E.  And it is.  But, again, this is a narrative first issue.  3E presumes a system of magic.  And the spells per day idea is intended to capture that concept and then tweaked to strive for balance.  The system is not designed for balance first and then tweaked to strive for narrative merit.  And, of you really hate Vancian magic but like D20 in general, the magic system can be completely replaced.  There are a lot of quality alternatives out there.  The power system is pretty fundamental to the 4E concept.I'm sure you could also point at numerous other examples in 3E where the mechanics have patterns.  I know you can.  I know I can.  But those fall into two categories.  The first is places where the mechanic is an effort to model a narrative idea and the second is just bad design.  And in either case, if you don't like it you can completely replace it because the root of the game system is not in question.Obviously this is all about powers.  Powers is just part of the big picture in design philosophy of 4E.  You could talk about minions, homogenous character capability, NPCs not like PCs, DCs based on level not concept, etc, etc...  These are all outgrowths of the root idea behind 4E.  And I don't have any argument with loving 4E for exactly these reasons.  I'm just saying that the issues do exist.  For both good and for bad.</blockquote>

Verification