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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hellcow" data-source="post: 4123178" data-attributes="member: 15800">I'd argue that the rogue has the exact same ability today. As I said, Bluff or Acrobatics? Streetwise or Stealth? Class and personal choice are still involved in your skills, and the "everyone advances" thing plays a secondary role. Again, I look to the warlock in my group - the shady archaeologist with Intimidate, History, and Streetwise, who can find the fence and lean on him when he does. I ran the same adventure for both of my groups. In the first, there was a big fight. In the second, the paladin and the warlock intimidated the crap out of the people instead of fighting them; there was a bit of a scuffle with the few people too tough to fall for it, but not much to speak of. If the paladin had taken Athletics instead of Intimidate, and the Warlock had chosen Arcana? Would have been an entirely different scene. The bulk of one's COMBAT abilities come from class powers. In noncombat situations, those powers play a minor role - save for the utility powers that help in these situations. And there, again, it's a choice as to whether you pick utility powers that favor combat or noncombat situations. Honestly, I can't speak to this, because here's a situation where I haven't seen the final rules. It's possible that what I've been using (and enjoying) are inaccurate. But this assertion - "Sure, you can solve this riddle with Athletics because you kick the sphinx in the nose" - is not how I've been reading the rules I've been given, and seems silly to me (while it would be up to the DM to say "Um, no", I find the idea that you could use Nature in a situation that clearly calls for Streetwise to be silly.). However, as I said, in this case I only know the rules I've been using, and I don't actually know if they're final. (And in any case, there's more to a skill challenge than making a single check.) Again, I'm not saying we do get to one broader and better. I'm saying that 4E is the KotOR to 3E's SWG. If you want to focus on the life of the commoner, or to be able to make a PC who begins with 4 HP and no combat abilities, it's NOT the system for you. Heck, if you want to make a bard or druid on day one, it's not the system for you. Absolute versatility is NOT the goal here; it's not trying to be GURPS or Hero. At the same time, I have no trouble running a murder mystery, an intrigue at a political embassy, or a traditional dungeon crawl if that's what I want to do. It's not broader than 3E. If you're deeply attached to things like NPC classes, you can easily say it's not as broad. But I've certainly been able to tell the stories I want to tell - and my PCs haven't had any trouble creating unique and interesting characters. The warlorck in the first group is that shady archaeologist, who's made a pact with elder gods for his arcane powers... and who feels completely different from the Lyrandar warlock in group two, who has bargained with the storm for her powers and who doesn't know a thing about history or the mean streets.</blockquote>

Verification