Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 4020300" data-attributes="member: 710">It's certainly not reinventing the wheel. It is more "making things more obvious". Many things in 4E seem to do this. Maybe this is just the first edition where the designers are able (or willing) to show us this stuff. The roles aren't a new concept, either, they always existed.The new thing (if at all) might be that the designers are conciously looking at this stuff and building the Core rules on it, instead of having it as some kind of emergent property that always comes into being, but no one really actively trying to achieve it. What makes a working combat group*: Covering the 4 roles.What makes a working adventuring setting: Points of Light.Is this the only way? I don't know, but I tend to think absolutely yes in the 1st case, and very probably yes in the second case...*) I first wanted to write adventuring party, but I think the roles are to combat specific for the most part to say so. Adventuring parties typically need also abilities outside of these roles. The roles are "for combat purposes only". Outside you might have someone like "Face", "Knowledge Guy", "Spelunker" or things like that. If there is a mistake in 4E, it might be not yet definding the out-of-combat roles...</blockquote>