Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Maxperson" data-source="post: 9071015" data-attributes="member: 23751">That simply isn't true.  Let's say 3e was 83 combat and 44 roleplay.  Those are ratings, not percentages.  If 4e went to 212 combat and 87 roleplay, it's still the most combat oriented of the two editions even though roleplaying support nearly doubled.In any case, I think playstyle is a huge part of how they view the editions.  A more roleplay oriented group is naturally going to gravitate to that 87 and not the 212 so much, so it's not going to seem as combat focused of an edition to them.  A group that likes to have a combat or three a session mixed into their roleplay is going to be hit by that 212 a lot more, so it's going to seem more combat oriented.Now I don't personally have any play experience with 4e, so I have no ideas if any of those numbers are anywhere near accurate.  They were just to show how someone can view an edition as the most combat oriented while NOT meaning that it's the least supportive of anything that isn't combat.  To assume that such a view is there "effectively 100% of the time" is wrong.</blockquote>