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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="mmadsen" data-source="post: 5599196" data-attributes="member: 1645">I agree completely with Pawsplay that those were major changes to the flavor of the game -- and I agree with Redbadge's original point that those were just flavor changes: I can't say I fully share (or understand) this list of core 4E "innovations":I think the 4E designers made a valiant effort to study the game as a game and to understand the trade-offs players actually make while playing.  Where they failed to meet my needs is in translating those gamist insights into plausible simulationist mechanics that wouldn't break my suspension of disbelief and immersion.So, a designer could take the innovation of giving fighters non-magical powers and implement it quite differently to create something more to my taste than either 3E or 4E.One of the biggest clashes between my taste and 4E's philosophy is the way it conflates player choices and character choices, so the character seemingly knows he can perform certain feats exactly once per encounter or day and makes certain choices to maximize abstract hit-point "damage" that isn't damage against enemies while "healing" allies who aren't hurt, etc., in surprisingly concrete ways that don't match the abstraction of the hit-point scale.I think the innovation of explicitly using hit points for something other than actual damage was a fine idea, but it would have worked better if they'd truly divorced it from physical damage and avoided terms like "healing surge", etc.</blockquote>

Verification