Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ridley's Cohort" data-source="post: 5969393" data-attributes="member: 545">Not nasssty optimizzzzation.&nbsp; No.&nbsp; Not that, my precioussss.I am surprised how eager some seem to dance around the word &quot;optimization&quot;, with the implied presumption the word were a pejorative.&nbsp; It is as if some editions rise above by the blessing of &quot;good play&quot;, &quot;smart play&quot;, &quot;making the best characters&quot;, and &quot;making cool characters&quot;.&nbsp; Let's not call it optimization, no, no, no.If low optimization were the prize, 4e gives even Oe a run for its money, because it is sufficiently well balanced that any reasonable sounding guess is mechanically okay.&nbsp; None of the good old &quot;Oh, humans are just as good.&nbsp; You will see on that day you reach 13th level.&nbsp; If.&nbsp; Ha!&nbsp; Ha!&nbsp; Ha!&quot;3e surely does go the the bottom of the ladder, but primarily because of so many excellent expansions and optional fun like monsters with levels, a &quot;problem&quot; most of its competitors conspicuously lack.&nbsp; Regarding Core, the number of important charts in 1e/2e/3e is not very different at all.&nbsp; No one ever put a gun to your head to carefully consider every possible 3e feat choice, instead of grabbing an obvious one.&nbsp; &quot;Fighter?&nbsp; Weapon Focus, Improved Initiative, Power Attack.&nbsp; Pick any two.&quot;Gygax himself was a dyed in the wool wargamer, and numerical optimization is a basic tool in the toolbox of every competent grognard.&nbsp; I can hear him laughing at these nostalgia-induced hallucinations, from beyond the grave.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ridley's Cohort, post: 5969393, member: 545"] [I]Not nasssty optimizzzzation. No. Not that, my precioussss.[/I] I am surprised how eager some seem to dance around the word "optimization", with the implied presumption the word were a pejorative. It is as if some editions rise above by the blessing of "good play", "smart play", "making the best characters", and "making cool characters". Let's not call it optimization, no, no, no. If low optimization were the prize, 4e gives even Oe a run for its money, because it is sufficiently well balanced that any reasonable sounding guess is mechanically okay. None of the good old "Oh, humans are just as good. You will see on that day you reach 13th level. If. Ha! Ha! Ha!" 3e surely does go the the bottom of the ladder, but primarily because of so many excellent expansions and optional fun like monsters with levels, a "problem" most of its competitors conspicuously lack. Regarding Core, the number of important charts in 1e/2e/3e is not very different at all. No one ever put a gun to your head to carefully consider every possible 3e feat choice, instead of grabbing an obvious one. "Fighter? Weapon Focus, Improved Initiative, Power Attack. Pick any two." Gygax himself was a dyed in the wool wargamer, and numerical optimization is a basic tool in the toolbox of every competent grognard. I can hear him laughing at these nostalgia-induced hallucinations, from beyond the grave. [/QUOTE]

Verification