Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="A'koss" data-source="post: 3818632" data-attributes="member: 840">So far 4e (mechanics-wise) is incorporating a lot of the things I've long harped on wishing they would do - simplifying skills, emphasizing the character over the items, bringing the overall power of the wizards down at the higher levels, but giving them more to do, designing epic rules alongside the core, spell crits, removing save or nerf powers, stronger 1st level characters, redesigning the "stat abomination" monsters, introducing "per encounter" abilities and more goodness from Iron Heroes. Further, they're doing things with the game I didn't expect, but so far like a lot - saves as defenses, differentiating similar monsters by tactics, the easier encounter-building, more fighter options...So yes, I definitely have to give it a thumbs up so far. My biggest concern (rules-wise) is that it won't be adequetely playtested. Even though 4e is less a departure than 3e was from 2e, they are still introducing a lot of new(ish) concepts and tweaking a lot of rules. 2-3 months playtesting with the first solid set of rules seems frighteningly short to me. I've PT 3e for 7 or 8 months and I thought that was short. It takes weeks to fully de-program yourself with the rules you know and re-program it with the ones you need to...</blockquote>