NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GreyICE" data-source="post: 6015600" data-attributes="member: 6684526">I haven't found that to be the case.  3E has severe issues with intricate tactics being optimal.  Mostly, you want to do the following in your average combat:- Pick your best spell or attack, slam it home.- RepeatThe need for all melee to do full attack actions removes positioning and anything related to it from being much of an interesting thing - you stand still.  What 3E is is very strategic.  You have to pick and choose how you will fight a tough battle.  Summon and grapple?  Which target do you attack first?  What's the most efficient way to win?  These are all strategic concerns, but once you're done with that, everything left is executing the strategy.  The plethora of precombat buffs and temporary buffs that make things a lot easier, as well as specialized spells and other abilities that work very well against the right targets is, again, strategy.  So if we were ranking them, 4E starts out at a 3 and goes to 10 in tactics (tactical concerns are basically necessary to get anywhere).  3E starts at a 1, and goes to maybe 6.  In strategy, 4E starts at 1 and goes to maybe 4-5 (power conservation, a few potions, etc.), 3E starts at 1 and goes to 10.The change can be seen in how easy it is to wear a party down.  3E, long-term resource management is huge.  And that's all strategy.  Wear down the party's resources, and you can lose - not that fight, not the next fight, but the third or fourth fight.4E, wearing down the party's resources is tough, and even a party bereft of daily attacks and low on healing surges can find lots to do in an encounter.It's just a different focus, and a different game.</blockquote>

Verification