Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Oofta" data-source="post: 7465617" data-attributes="member: 6801845">Perhaps.&nbsp; Like I said, I no longer have access to my books.&nbsp; But the very concept of encounter and daily powers as limited abilities is one of the things that, to many people, meant you couldn't be a truly mundane fighter.Yes you could add fluff that says &quot;you can't do X because you've already pulled that trick once and now they're expecting it&quot;.&nbsp; Bit of a stretch, but okay.&nbsp; But then you hit a completely different group of people who didn't see you do X.&nbsp; So instead you say, &quot;you only have enough energy to do that once in a while&quot; which to me was even worse.&nbsp; How much &quot;energy&quot; does it take to distract an enemy so I could run past without provoking?&nbsp;&nbsp; The fluff fell apart like the tissue-paper-thin cover that it was.&nbsp; We all just shrugged and admitted we were all using magic*, no matter what the labels said.That doesn't make it a good or bad game mechanic.&nbsp; It just meant that no amount of fluff could change it's nature or the feel that it left with many people.&nbsp; It's one of the reasons I'll probably never play a battlemaster. Either you're powered by some supernatural/mystical force or not. Last, but not least, unlike my wife I didn't hate 4E by the end of it's run.&nbsp; I had decided that I preferred a 3.5/Pathfinder approach.&nbsp; I like 5E even more.&nbsp; I'm hardly alone with that sentiment.&nbsp; Of course this is all just, like, an opinion man.Good gaming, and can we stop debating a dead game version now?*Disclaimer: &quot;magic&quot; as in the common non-gamer-speak definition, not Magic(TM) as defined in the rules.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Oofta, post: 7465617, member: 6801845"] Perhaps. Like I said, I no longer have access to my books. But the very concept of encounter and daily powers as limited abilities is one of the things that, to many people, meant you couldn't be a truly mundane fighter. Yes you could add fluff that says "you can't do X because you've already pulled that trick once and now they're expecting it". Bit of a stretch, but okay. But then you hit a completely different group of people who didn't see you do X. So instead you say, "you only have enough energy to do that once in a while" which to me was even worse. How much "energy" does it take to distract an enemy so I could run past without provoking? The fluff fell apart like the tissue-paper-thin cover that it was. We all just shrugged and admitted we were all using magic*, no matter what the labels said. That doesn't make it a good or bad game mechanic. It just meant that no amount of fluff could change it's nature or the feel that it left with many people. It's one of the reasons I'll probably never play a battlemaster. Either you're powered by some supernatural/mystical force or not. Last, but not least, unlike my wife I didn't hate 4E by the end of it's run. I had decided that I preferred a 3.5/Pathfinder approach. I like 5E even more. I'm hardly alone with that sentiment. Of course this is all just, like, an opinion man. Good gaming, and can we stop debating a dead game version now? *[I]Disclaimer: "magic" as in the common non-gamer-speak definition, not Magic(TM) as defined in the rules.[/I] [/QUOTE]

Verification