Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Fanaelialae" data-source="post: 5060595" data-attributes="member: 53980">Those resources are essentially just &quot;safety nets&quot; to either preemptively swing a combat in your favor, or to swing it back in your favor when you have tactical mishaps or bad luck.3e had them too though, in the form of spells.&nbsp; A single Web or Entangle spell could easily end a combat before it truly had begun.&nbsp; Spells like Heal (and particularly Mass Heal) could allow you to essentially reset the encounter for your entire party.The biggest difference that I can see between the two is that 4e grants everyone &quot;safety net&quot; abilities, whereas in 3e not every class really had them (ie., the fighter's only &quot;safety&quot; is having more hp than most classes, which is hardly on the same level as Heal).&nbsp; That said, I think saying that in 4e the only difference between good and bad tactics are a few resources is misleading.&nbsp; Death may be easier to avoid in 4e because it can't normally surprise you, but the risk is still present, particularly if you engage in poor tactics (the fighter's low on hp but I'll just wait a round so I can heal him from negatives since it's more efficient; oops, the enemy rolled well to hit and he passed negative bloodied).The main difference is the amount of time the players have to decide whether a resource must be expended or not.&nbsp; In 3e you usually need to decide in the first or second round whether or not to bring out the big guns or conserve.&nbsp; Any longer and you may have a TPK on your hands.&nbsp; In 4e, I find the decision must usually be made by the third or fourth round, so you have more of a chance to assess the situation you're in.Again, IMO neither is better or worse, it really just comes down to a (subjective) style preference.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Fanaelialae, post: 5060595, member: 53980"] Those resources are essentially just "safety nets" to either preemptively swing a combat in your favor, or to swing it back in your favor when you have tactical mishaps or bad luck. 3e had them too though, in the form of spells. A single Web or Entangle spell could easily end a combat before it truly had begun. Spells like Heal (and particularly Mass Heal) could allow you to essentially reset the encounter for your entire party. The biggest difference that I can see between the two is that 4e grants everyone "safety net" abilities, whereas in 3e not every class really had them (ie., the fighter's only "safety" is having more hp than most classes, which is hardly on the same level as Heal). That said, I think saying that in 4e the only difference between good and bad tactics are a few resources is misleading. Death may be easier to avoid in 4e because it can't normally surprise you, but the risk is still present, [i]particularly[/i] if you engage in poor tactics (the fighter's low on hp but I'll just wait a round so I can heal him from negatives since it's more efficient; oops, the enemy rolled well to hit and he passed negative bloodied). The main difference is the amount of time the players have to decide whether a resource must be expended or not. In 3e you usually need to decide in the first or second round whether or not to bring out the big guns or conserve. Any longer and you may have a TPK on your hands. In 4e, I find the decision must usually be made by the third or fourth round, so you have more of a chance to assess the situation you're in. Again, IMO neither is better or worse, it really just comes down to a (subjective) style preference. [/QUOTE]

Verification