Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 7020841" data-attributes="member: 82106">Well, 'classic' D&amp;D was about testing the player. Characters were almost like units in a wargame back in the day. I'm not saying it wasn't RP, but the mindset came out of games, and it was primarily about the player, with characters being fairly secondary. So what the character's attributes were was relatively less important. Every character was pretty equal (in the original OD&amp;D rules there were no attribute bonuses at all for instance) and it was about what you accumulated and what you DID with the character. If you had a certain character ability it was basically static and universal (all dwarves could detect sloping passages, it didn't matter what your WIS or INT was, nor was there an option to have some other ability instead). Now, 2e started to diverge from that pattern to SOME extent, there were kits and a few build options, NWPs, etc and by then the emphasis of the game had shifted more onto what the characters were doing, what their story was, RPing them, etc. Still, aside from some random differences due to ability scores, a fighter was pretty much a fighter, etc. 4e certainly didn't invent the 'new way' here though, 3e definitely did that! By introducing feats if nothing else (though I would say ala-carte MCing and PrCs are at least as indicative of this) 3e made each character unique, though ironically the 'standard array' and point systems actually removed variations in ability scores. Anyway, 4e definitely does internalize a lot more of what makes a character what he is, as part of its &quot;all characters are heroes&quot; ethos. Oddly the game didn't quite follow through on that mechanically, as items are pretty vital to all characters, at least until PHB3/DS introduced inherent bonuses (admittedly we used them as early as 2008 though). One of those interesting aspects of 4e where it promised and then stepped back a bit from fully delivering.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 7020841, member: 82106"] Well, 'classic' D&D was about testing the player. Characters were almost like units in a wargame back in the day. I'm not saying it wasn't RP, but the mindset came out of games, and it was primarily about the player, with characters being fairly secondary. So what the character's attributes were was relatively less important. Every character was pretty equal (in the original OD&D rules there were no attribute bonuses at all for instance) and it was about what you accumulated and what you DID with the character. If you had a certain character ability it was basically static and universal (all dwarves could detect sloping passages, it didn't matter what your WIS or INT was, nor was there an option to have some other ability instead). Now, 2e started to diverge from that pattern to SOME extent, there were kits and a few build options, NWPs, etc and by then the emphasis of the game had shifted more onto what the characters were doing, what their story was, RPing them, etc. Still, aside from some random differences due to ability scores, a fighter was pretty much a fighter, etc. 4e certainly didn't invent the 'new way' here though, 3e definitely did that! By introducing feats if nothing else (though I would say ala-carte MCing and PrCs are at least as indicative of this) 3e made each character unique, though ironically the 'standard array' and point systems actually removed variations in ability scores. Anyway, 4e definitely does internalize a lot more of what makes a character what he is, as part of its "all characters are heroes" ethos. Oddly the game didn't quite follow through on that mechanically, as items are pretty vital to all characters, at least until PHB3/DS introduced inherent bonuses (admittedly we used them as early as 2008 though). One of those interesting aspects of 4e where it promised and then stepped back a bit from fully delivering. [/QUOTE]

Verification