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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jmucchiello" data-source="post: 4916998" data-attributes="member: 813">So, I posted a thread 27 hours ago. I wonder if there were any responses....I would like to thank those who stuck with it and posted ideas for doing things differently. Some of them might even be feasible within the GSL. I did not know about the Monk and Psion so that was an eye opener. If one of them had been in the PHB I wonder if the perception espoused by KM in this thread might have been mitigated a little.I also liked the idea of more class abilities. But with the number of existing classes it's a little late for that.What do I think is homogenius about 4e? It doesn't matter. That was the thread I forked from. I wanted to know what could be done to reduce that perception. If you don't perceive it, don't post (or state politely you disagree). BryonD was the person I quoted so his response there is a good starting point. Also, KM provided excellent insight into the definition.At the risk of perpetuating the edition war: Most of the folk who say 4e is tactically varied point out that this class hangs back and this other class runs around looking for flanks. I fail to see how that didn't exist in older editions. But then, I've been using a battlemat for combat since 1e so tactics have always been important in combat. Characters always had combat roles, they just were not strictly tied to class.Anyway, I don't have to respond to specific posts. Carry on.And no, I have not played 4e. I haven't played anything in two years. Woe is me.</blockquote>

Verification