Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="billd91" data-source="post: 4257466" data-attributes="member: 3400">This style of play emerged "spontaneously" because it was a style of play already out there since the first fighter in 1st edition eschewed proficiency in broadsword in order to use a long sword because it did better damage against large creatures and constituted 70% of all magic swords. Lots of players naturally want the most bang they can get for their buck and Dragon has been covering aspects of it, sometimes favorably sometimes non, since the early days. But it's never been universal.3E provided substantive tools to support that style of play, sure, but it also provided substantive tools to support a style of play geared in a completely different direction AND tools to support a style of play that sat on the fence. That wasn't really new either, but a certain level of customization and granularity was new. The deciding factor is, and always has been, the approach the group takes to it. I agree that there have been plenty of people who talk up a high falutin' game of ROLE-play and INTRIGUE and end up kicking in doors and swinging swords to the point where you'd be justified in calling it bait and switch. But, again, that was nothing new with 3E either and I predict it will continue on in 4e. It's just easier, in many ways, to run pulse pounding action games than the alternative. Pick the monsters, find an interesting place to fight, let the dice roll.</blockquote>