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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5658213" data-attributes="member: 42582">Is the first passage quoted here intended to generate an implication that 3E/PF is an RPG, and that 4e is best suited to (or, perhaps, is at best) a tactical skirmish game?If it was not intended to generate that implication, then I think it was very poorly written.If it was intended to generate that implication - which is how I interpreted it - then I think my original response to it stands.As for the question of whether or not 4e handles combat well - yes, I agree it does. But I also happen to think it is a better roleplaying vehicle, for my purposes, than is 3E. So do many other players of 4e. And whether or not one thinks it is better than 3E for one's purposes, or worse, what is the need to imply that it is not a roleplaying game?In other words, your suite of options was missing this one:Dungeons and Dragons - Indie Edition: 4e with some mechanical tidying up, and some significant rewriting of the guidelines, to make it clear how 4e is to be played as a crunch-heavy, player-driven game of heroic fantasy protagonism - something like Burning Wheel but less gritty, and with the thematic play handled less by mechanical bells and whistles and more by the way that GMs and players approach the design and resolution of encounters.If you had included that option, or some other option that takes seriously the approach and virtues of 4e as a RPG, then I wouldn't have responded as I did.</blockquote>

Verification