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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="demadog" data-source="post: 4316432" data-attributes="member: 8156">I agree with many of the previous posters that 4e does as much and perhaps a little more to promote role-playing, especially with the addition of skill challenges for social interactions.  It does have its weaknesses though with the at least initial elimination of several background and out-of-combat skill choices.  Still, in my DnD experience the overwhelming support for role-playing comes from the group and the DM.  Each group seems to find the level of role-playing they are comfortable at with or without support from the rules.However, with that being said, I imagine that some of the reaction towards new edition's role-playing comes from a player ability to conceptualize their character.  With 4e being a fairly large departure from previous editions, some players don't yet know how to translate their ideas into a character.  In fact, some are skeptical that their ideas will translate and they may indeed be right.Early editions of the game supported just about anthing you could think of because their were very few rules to hinder those ideas.  In my opinion 3e took that to the next level by doing its best to add rules to support a vast number of character concepts with quite a bit of help from the OGL.  My early impression of 4e leads me to believe that it can hinder many of those character concepts.  Moreover, my main point would be that players just dont yet know how to translate those concepts into a whole host of unfamiliar powers, races, feats, paragon paths, and epic destinies.  I guess that the unfamiliarity will pass and my hope is that I'm wrong about the new editions tendancy to hinder some concepts.</blockquote>

Verification