Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6226052" data-attributes="member: 82106">In a word, yeah, it is rather. If you look at 4e on the day it came out you'd have say a typical fighter with a daily, an encounter power, 2 at-wills, and lets say he's a dwarf he's got several passive benefits (save vs push, +5 saves vs poison, I forget exactly what else). You'd also possibly have a feat that might add something, but 95% of the time it will just be a static bonus (IE dwarves would generally take something like Dwarven Weapon Training). So, the model was a fairly restricted set of options, the character would also have had a combat superiority move to remember, but that would be it. That's a fair amount but not TOO much. Even in that day a paragon dwarf fighter would have something like 3 daily powers, 3 encounter powers, probably something from at least one feat, and some sort of PP thing. Nowadays your level 1 guy has at least an extra power for his theme. Many of the newer classes have a bit more complex options than just &quot;2 at-will and some sort of class feature&quot;. It does get a bit cluttered when you factor in all the APs and other possible actions. I think early 4e was a bit on the complex side, and modern 4e is a bit TOO far on the complex side. That's probably the worst aspect of 4e. Even so, 4e's rules are so simple and well-structured that you CAN deal with it. The issue is more when you have the type of players that don't want to deal at all with mechanical issues. They may feel a bit out of their depth. I've had players that never really MASTERED the rules for their character. There are some relatively simple classes though, like Ranger, Slayer, etc.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 6226052, member: 82106"] In a word, yeah, it is rather. If you look at 4e on the day it came out you'd have say a typical fighter with a daily, an encounter power, 2 at-wills, and lets say he's a dwarf he's got several passive benefits (save vs push, +5 saves vs poison, I forget exactly what else). You'd also possibly have a feat that might add something, but 95% of the time it will just be a static bonus (IE dwarves would generally take something like Dwarven Weapon Training). So, the model was a fairly restricted set of options, the character would also have had a combat superiority move to remember, but that would be it. That's a fair amount but not TOO much. Even in that day a paragon dwarf fighter would have something like 3 daily powers, 3 encounter powers, probably something from at least one feat, and some sort of PP thing. Nowadays your level 1 guy has at least an extra power for his theme. Many of the newer classes have a bit more complex options than just "2 at-will and some sort of class feature". It does get a bit cluttered when you factor in all the APs and other possible actions. I think early 4e was a bit on the complex side, and modern 4e is a bit TOO far on the complex side. That's probably the worst aspect of 4e. Even so, 4e's rules are so simple and well-structured that you CAN deal with it. The issue is more when you have the type of players that don't want to deal at all with mechanical issues. They may feel a bit out of their depth. I've had players that never really MASTERED the rules for their character. There are some relatively simple classes though, like Ranger, Slayer, etc. [/QUOTE]

Verification