Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 4620073" data-attributes="member: 48965">Again you assume everyone looks at all of these as problems, which I find hard to believe since we aren't a hive mind (You know, like how not everyone looked at the Wizard as a "problem"), as well as that they like all of them meshed together.  Those are pretty big assumptions.  I know I like some of them, but I don't like the way all of them came together in 4e and the effect it had on the feel and play style of the game for my group, so for me 4e is not a better choice.  YMMV, and all that of course.The actual misconception is again that 3.5 never addressed these problems and contrary to your popular belief I have seen posters make those type of statements.  You don't believe that out of all the people on this board maybe a few or even some have never seen the rules in UA?  Well I find it just as hard, especially after I brought them up and people did act like they had never read them before, that everyone does know about them.  Neither one of us can prove this and since my thread doesn't in any way impede on your fun with 4e...why do you care?The funny thing is the fact that most of these things are labeled as "problems" means they are probably already accounted for in the rules but the core rules handles it badly.  Taking your example of reserve points...so what, people have been complaining they want their PC's to go longer without having to rest... this solves that problem, so why would they run into a problem of adapting anything... a game sessions would probably get more done, but I don't see how this causes any problems...since that's what you wanted.  Reserve points double hit points, so expect your PC's to go through, on average, 2x as many encounters before having to rest.  Just doesn't seem that hard to account for, and after a few play sessions you'll probably have it down pretty much to a science.Buying 3 new corebooks and the supplements is only easier if...A. You like all the changes they madeB. Don't care about the investment you've put into 3eC. Are ready to ride the supplement train again, but of course there''s no     guarantee new problems won't pop up and need to be fixed with...variant or optional rules (Skill Challenges)D. Actaully like the new game enough overall to invest in it.And I would argue that regardless of how easy the changes are to make in 4e, if you don't like the underlying basis of the game you probably aren't interested in using it.  Why is it so hard to believe that many here would rather continue their play experience with 3.5 and tweak it, than pay to switch their play experience totally over to the assumptions of 4e and then still have to tweak it?</blockquote>

Verification