Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Magil" data-source="post: 6019856" data-attributes="member: 6672353">I don't think your antecedental evidence is worth scrapping a reasonably convenient format. Personally, when I played a Slayer, I wasn't envious of other classes for what they had. Also, putting all the spells in a separate section isn't enough to fool most people from realizing that full casters get a bunch of extra options that other classes don't have access to.(BTW, I think you're kind of missing the point of Essentials, it was designed for people who wanted a more classic-feeling rogue or fighter. If you wanted a rogue or fighter that got as many powers as the wizard and cleric, the PHB is right there.)Incidentally, however, I do agree that there is probably a mentality that develops from 4E powers that your character is limited to those powers when you decide what it can do. It's not true, of course, but it's definitely something I've noticed and seen, when faced with a situation or their turn in combat, a player thinks &quot;what power should I use&quot; rather than &quot;what should my character do,&quot; which is a problem. It's purely psychological, of course, the 4E rules actually support improv well, but that doesn't mean it's not something that should be addressed.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Magil, post: 6019856, member: 6672353"] I don't think your antecedental evidence is worth scrapping a reasonably convenient format. Personally, when I played a Slayer, I wasn't envious of other classes for what they had. Also, putting all the spells in a separate section isn't enough to fool most people from realizing that full casters get a bunch of extra options that other classes don't have access to. (BTW, I think you're kind of missing the point of Essentials, it was designed for people who wanted a more classic-feeling rogue or fighter. If you wanted a rogue or fighter that got as many powers as the wizard and cleric, the PHB is right there.) Incidentally, however, I do agree that there is probably a mentality that develops from 4E powers that your character is limited to those powers when you decide what it can do. It's not true, of course, but it's definitely something I've noticed and seen, when faced with a situation or their turn in combat, a player thinks "what power should I use" rather than "what should my character do," which is a problem. It's purely psychological, of course, the 4E rules actually support improv well, but that doesn't mean it's not something that should be addressed. [/QUOTE]

Verification