Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Felon" data-source="post: 4173483" data-attributes="member: 8158">I've read so many things about 4e that really appeal to me that I hope that on this issue it's a simple matter of not seeing the full picture, because it's really on the cusp of being a deal-breaker.OK, but look at what you're talking about and then look at how the rules implement it, Just saying "use Con for attack and damage instead of Str when using axes" is a very ham-handed way of trying to factor Con into the arena of damage-dealing. In 4e, it looks like they not only decided to opt for simplicity over complexity, but they also opted for simplicity over elegance and accuracy as well. I've listened to every podcast, read their preview articles, and I constantly get the vibe that when it came down to deciding how to handle something mechanically, they decided a "close enough for government work" solution was ultimately the way to go.When you can shill one ability score for another--use Strength for your defenses, use Con for your offenses, despite them being intended explicitly to serve the reverse functions--it really makes me wonder what's being accomplished. I can be frail and unhealthy but still have a good Fortitude defense, because my stamina suddenly doesn't affect the numbers. I can be a 98-lb weakling and still cleave through plate mail, because muscle simply ceased to be a consideration. That's very awkward and unintuitive.</blockquote>