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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercule" data-source="post: 4077921" data-attributes="member: 5100">Strange.  I had a conversation with my group recently about my frustrations GMing 3e.  One of the big ones is that 3e is very, very poorly suited to any character-driven storyline or one that doesn't put most of the burden of improvement on combat.  I see nothing to indicate that 4e has made this any more true.  If anything, it's only just stopped pretending, though, I doubt even that.Honestly, I'm a bit excited about the possibility for roleplaying in 4e.  It's been explicitly stated, more than once, that we'll be getting some sort of resolution mechanics for non-combat challenges that give structure to negotiations, traps, and even library research; taking each of these beyond a single die roll.  That's awesome -- in 3e, my options were threefold: 1) meta-game and let the players use their abilities/knowledge rather that that of their characters, 2) use a single roll against a set DC and have the negotiation with the king/attaining access to the ancient library/etc. be anti-climactic, or 3) GM fiat lots and lots of stuff.  How does 4e make any of those worse?I do agree with you, somewhat, about healing and injury.  Then again, I can't remember ever having permanent effects from injury in D&D, unless the group was using house/supplemental rules.  The only thing that happened is that you marked off some time and checked for wandering monsters.  4e just has fewer rolls and ticky marks.</blockquote>

Verification