Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="JoeGKushner" data-source="post: 3848628" data-attributes="member: 1129">So Chuck, you're saying that if they go..Month One Core:Humans... talk about humans in the game. Talk about how they were actually in the monster manual. Talk about how many sword and sorcery fiction books that initially inspired the game were all about the humans, etc... would be too much? Talk about how 3e was one of the first editions to bring some actual game mechanics to the humans that wasn't, &quot;Hey, we're average.&quot; and how 4e is going to continue to embrace that. There could be a weekly article about some of the standard roles humans are expected to fill and each one can come with a game mechanic. I mean if they give us that very specific bit about rangers and their shot return power, surely that's not too much? And for classes....Fighters. Talk about the fighters traditional role in the game. Talk about how 3e made some of the biggest changes to the class not only in terms of giving, via the bonus feats but also in taking away with the elimination of % strength and Con bonuses for everyone and what roles the fighter can take in 4e, that I'd be upset?You're right. We do have eight months. But in that eight months, since they keep touting how much better an electronic Dragon is, they've got a lot of shoes to fill and if the print Dragon could do a lot, the online version can too.(My opinion on the counterattack was yeah, that was &quot;Boom!&quot; It's so cool&quot; thing btw. Just my opinion mind you.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="JoeGKushner, post: 3848628, member: 1129"] So Chuck, you're saying that if they go.. Month One Core: Humans... talk about humans in the game. Talk about how they were actually in the monster manual. Talk about how many sword and sorcery fiction books that initially inspired the game were all about the humans, etc... would be too much? Talk about how 3e was one of the first editions to bring some actual game mechanics to the humans that wasn't, "Hey, we're average." and how 4e is going to continue to embrace that. There could be a weekly article about some of the standard roles humans are expected to fill and each one can come with a game mechanic. I mean if they give us that very specific bit about rangers and their shot return power, surely that's not too much? And for classes.... Fighters. Talk about the fighters traditional role in the game. Talk about how 3e made some of the biggest changes to the class not only in terms of giving, via the bonus feats but also in taking away with the elimination of % strength and Con bonuses for everyone and what roles the fighter can take in 4e, that I'd be upset? You're right. We do have eight months. But in that eight months, since they keep touting how much better an electronic Dragon is, they've got a lot of shoes to fill and if the print Dragon could do a lot, the online version can too. (My opinion on the counterattack was yeah, that was "Boom!" It's so cool" thing btw. Just my opinion mind you.) [/QUOTE]

Verification