NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Xetheral" data-source="post: 7936030" data-attributes="member: 6802765">I've played MtG a long time ago. I'm having a bit of a hard time wrapping my brain around the idea of comparing the differences between deck themes in MtG and character classes in D&D. That's probably because I view MtG as a self-contained game, whereas I see the mechanical elements of D&D (like classes) as a tool for running games (i.e. adventures and campaigns). So the question feels a bit like being asked to compare the replayability of Chess with the effectiveness of image rescaling in Photoshop. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />But yes, after thinking about it I would view the deck archetypes in MtG as "samey" in the same way I see classes in 4e as "samey". Indeed, I would consider deck archetypes "samey" to a far greater extent than 4e classes. But the "samey-ness" of deck archetypes doesn't concern me, because I'm not trying to use MtG to model anything, so there are no IC relationships that I want the mechanics to maintain. By contrast, 4e's unified AEDU framework models all powers identically, regardless of the degree of similarities or differences between the IC capabilities they represent. I'd rather that (especially when it comes to IC distinctions that are important to me, like mundane vs magical abilities) similar capabilities had been modeled similarly and different capabilities had been modeled differently. (Upthread I used the example of 5e's Battlemaster Manuevers and Warlock spell slots. Both recover on a short rest but are otherwise mechanically distinct in a way that Encounter powers are not.) That would have helped the mechanics emphasize (rather than blur) the IC distinctions I care about.Admittedly, my preferences and views on "samey-ness" differ from those of many other posters, so my answer to your question likely isn't representative of what others think.</blockquote>

Verification