Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lord Mhoram" data-source="post: 5797199" data-attributes="member: 4789">I don't have any mechanics, class, race etc that is a deal breaker. I can always house rule the way I want.Balance, linear/quadratic - I can deal with it. Vancian or not, fine.The only thing close to a deal breaker for me, and it is just because of how I play...That it is capable (with minor house ruling*) to be playable as a 1 player game who runs two characters, in and out of combat - especially using published modules. Basically if the mechanics of the game are so focused on group play, and is rigid enough that making changes to it as to make solo play possible then I won't play it.I love 4E, I love the balance, I love the classes, I like the power choices - but it is designed so well to the type of game it plays, I couldn't play any prepublished adventure with only 2 characters, even when I tried making everyone multiclass for free, lots of extra action points and such. I was able to do that in 3rd, I did it for 15 years with 1st. Couldn't with 4E.This isn't a dig at the system, in the environment it was made for, I find it very fun. But our weekly game group plays a different system. I still like D&D, and so D&D is played solo (me and the wife) sometimes I GM, sometimes she does. But as we play in group in another system, have jobs and such, we don't have the time to make our own adventures. We rely on published ones.So that is the only thing that would be a "deal breaker" for me.Based on the scant information we have, I think it is going to be. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /></blockquote>

Verification