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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kraydak" data-source="post: 3941224" data-attributes="member: 12306">Not to rederail the thread, but I probably overspoke in regards to IH.  The design theory behind IH was interesting (and the reason I bought the book).  The game, however, needed a few hundred more hours of playtesting and some serious editorial work.  The save DCs were all over the place (most token ability saves were very low DC.  Some, included the Archer's save-or-die IIRC, were instead unsaveable.)  The Armiger didn't work.  The Harrier had abilities whose descriptions didn't parse.  Stunting was OMGWTF broken (hint: using jump to stunt for more movement to use jump to stunt for damage is a *bad* idea).  At least one combination of Power Attack or Cleave feat masteries looked like a 3AM brainstorm session (free movement and extra attacks for every hit that did over 10 damage?  something like that).That is what put me off 3rd party products: if such a high profile product, from a relatively high profile 3rd party company, was so poorly playtested, I didn't see any reason to buy more 3rd party stuff.  People may complain about WotC balancing, but at least you can rely on their 3ed stuff working from level 1 to 10.  (past 10 it gets iffy, a fact which, when combined with a dearth of 4e P and E playtesting reports is somewhat worrisome.  Not overly, just somewhat)  WotC is big enough to invest in editing and playtesting.  That makes their products worth my money.  I, at least, am not really paying for the ideas (which I could produce on my own) but rather the playtesting work (which I can't really).</blockquote>

Verification