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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GnomeWorks" data-source="post: 4137074" data-attributes="member: 162">I guess I may have been missing the forest for the trees, here. I'll admit that I have gotten a bit hung up on the terminology used - calling the power source "martial" brings to mind skill and nothing more. No mojo, no supernatural-ness.In whatever game I will be playing, anything called "martial" will rely upon nothing but awesome skill. I am aware that 4e may not have this interpretation, but I don't particularly care - I'll play the game how I want. If sense can be made out of martial abilities being daily and such, without breaking my interpretation of the martial power source, then neat! If not, then I won't use them. It really is as simple as that.Wow. Just... wow.Yes, it is my problem, and I'm fine with that. 4e's designers do seem to know what they're doing, I'll grant you that - the at-will / encounter / daily power paradigm is a pretty darn good one. However, they are not gearing the game towards my style of play - they do not have the same priorities I do, which is fine.However, I'm not going to accept their ideas just because they're backed by a large company. Sometimes two guys in a garage can have great ideas, too, you know.Yep, and I don't know if 4e will change it. I imagine not; while the economic system was stupendously stupid in 3e, if you followed the wealth guidelines, it did its job. The economy was meant, I think, as a gamist balancing tool.I don't think that currency should be used as a balancing factor, and that's not just as a simulationist: balancing game mechanics by using currency just seems like poor design, IMO. It works, sure, but it's clunky. Admittedly other and IMO better solutions require more work, but it's worth the effort, because I like simulationism.Well, I suppose I should be glad that people aren't taking things way too seriously around here, for once, eh? I don't see if that way, but if the argument amuses you, so be it.Actually, yes, there has: <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forums/showpost.php?p=4133490&postcount=47" target="_blank">here</a>. I'm totally fine with that explanation, and it works for me.</blockquote>

Verification