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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 4378611" data-attributes="member: 5834">reThe healing is true about books. The fluff may be true too.But as far as once a days and encounters, you don't see Elric and Conan limiting their attacks because they already used their "specials". The 4E melees do not feel like fighting styles to me, they feel like melees with magic powers.I much prefer a melee class with a fighting style than a melee class with magic powers rendered as melee abilities. 3E felt more like fighting styles. If you had Whirlwind attack, you could use it whenever conditions presented themselves for its use. That is how a fighter or any melee class should work. They don't train to use a fighting technique one time and be unable to use it until it "recharges". They train to use it whenever conditions present themselves for its use.That is the one thing about 4E that is troublesome to me from a literary standpoint. They get something like healing right, then they don't bother to build on that concept by thinking of fighting styles in the same manner. It's great that everyone can heal without a pocket cleric now, but encounter and daily powers don't seem very fighter-like to me. The classes do feel alike because they are all limited in the same way and all fundamentally function in the same way as far as the limits on their powers.Balancing every class off the same mechanic makes every class feel similar. I just don't think a fighter and a wizard should play the same way in terms of being limited to dailies and the like. It takes me out of the fantasy. A fighter having to sit on his dailies and encounters for the right time like a wizard had to do just seems is just as lacking as you claim 3.5 healing was in terms of rendering fantasy characters.</blockquote>

Verification