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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 4078172" data-attributes="member: 18">Let me be clear - At no point have I said anything about, nor do I care about whether 4E is "better for roleplaying", so like, okay, whateverrrrrr in regards to that, you're arguing with yourself there mate.What I'm concerned with is OUT-OF-COMBAT abilities. I like abilities which can be used in situations that DO NOT INVOLVE PHYSICAL COMBAT. I like these games with their "social combat" and so on. Maybe they're worse for role-playing, maybe they're better. I don't give a hoot. I just think it's really maximally retardo to make a game chock-full of "kewl powerz" and then make ALL the damn kewl powerz be combat abilities.Of course, I'm being a bit misleading. The Wizard has Ghost Sound, Light, and Mage Hand, all of which are not particularly combat oriented. I just think it's a bit wierd that he, of all people, is the ONLY one who has ANY abilities which aren't combat-oriented. It's not even clear if an ability like the Pally's LoH would even be usable out of combat, given it's limit on usage is "per encounter" (so can you freely hand out your "healing surges" if you're out of combat? Or do three and then sit for five mins then do another three or what?).And you may be right, maybe we see some more GENUINE utility abilities and so on at later levels. That'd be fine with me, but for now, it just seems a little lame to confine kewl powerz to combat, and combat alone.</blockquote>

Verification