Doug McCrae said:Surely there must be a sneak/lurker/ambusher role too. Or is that covered by skirmisher?
I do believe they did mention a lurker type. I also remember they talked about a leader that buffed other in the group.
-NetNomad
Doug McCrae said:Surely there must be a sneak/lurker/ambusher role too. Or is that covered by skirmisher?
Imagine the PHB1. It has rules for combat, and skills. But instead of the core classes, it had new classes, and new rules for how their powers worked. That may be the PHB2 - the same combat rule/feat/skill rules (but new feats instead of the old ones), but instead of Wizards/Warlocks and Clerics (and rules for their powers), it might have Druids and Psions, and rules for how their powers work.DaveMage said:I can't wrap my brain around that one.
Rechan said:Imagine the PHB1. It has rules for combat, and skills. But instead of the core classes, it had new classes, and new rules for how their powers worked. That may be the PHB2 - the same combat rule/feat/skill rules (but new feats instead of the old ones), but instead of Wizards/Warlocks and Clerics (and rules for their powers), it might have Druids and Psions, and rules for how their powers work.
DaveMage said:I can't wrap my brain around that one.
I'm probably too dense to play 4e.![]()
Ahh. So from what I understand you're saying:Greenfaun said:Yeah, that's not super-clear, but I would interpret what they said thusly:
Brutes are big, strong, and dangerous by themselves, because they're hard to kill and hit hard too, whereas soldiers are defensive, strategic fighters, that work well with others and use intelligent tactics. Basically, I think one strong brute might be a de facto meatshield, but mostly an offensive threat, whereas a couple of soldiers might be there specifically to protect the artillery/controller types. But yeah, I'd like more information too, it's not totally clear.
If I were doing it the way I am explaining, I would cut and paste the Combat/Skills chapter from the PHB1 into the PHB2. Probably with some refining or errata built into the system.DaveMage said:But are they going to print the combat rules in every book, or are the combat rules part of a class?
I see a lot of book confusion ahead if this plays out....
Vigilance said:This might not be the place to ask this question, and it will probably come across as rude, but I really am curious.
I have seen you say, several times, that you have no plans to play 4e, yet you're always here, pointing out how many bad calls they're making.
It just seems like a weird phenomenon to me, and you're far from the only one: folks who have decided, for whatever reason, that 4e isn't their cup of tea, but who seem to be in every major 4e thread continuing to let us know that yep, still not interested.
What's the fascination?
I say this with all due respect:DaveMage said:Simple. I have 27 years of emotional investment in the "franchise". I care about the game I love.
I'll wager that many who are doing the same are feeling the same way. It's not that we're posting about it to be jerks - even though it may come across that way - we're trying to figure out why the appeal is disappearing. We want real answers, and all we're getting is market-speak. Very frustrating.
Rechan said:I say this with all due respect:
Replace D&D with Star Trek or Star Wars.
Both have been going since the 70s, and I imagine there are people just as emotionally invested, put their entire lives into these movements.
And I may be wrong, but they usually cope when a new Star Trek show comes out, even if it screws up the continuity of the last one. And many Star Wars fans, while offended by Episodes 1-2-3, still have the various video games, and the ginormous amount of Star Wars novels.
There in lies the problem with attaching one's life to something that other people control. Because they will do something that upsets the people who have untold amounts of emotional investments in something.
Rechan said:There in lies the problem with attaching one's life to something that other people control. Because they will do something that upsets the people who have untold amounts of emotional investments in something.