Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 7024392" data-attributes="member: 82106">Right, those are all good points. Honestly I played little 3.x and no PF and can't say what the quality of Paizo adventures is, though I did read through one of the APs and frankly I wasn't overwhelmed. Still, it was MUCH better written and seemed more dynamic and engaging than the 4e HPE and other pre-Essentials-era adventures, which were kinda uniformly dull or at least required a lot of up front work to make them good.It certainly seemed like 4e launched into a huge headwind. The whole direction the market wanted to go right then was totally opposite, PF gave 3.5 fans an out, and WotC seemed incapable of consistently marketing what they had. Encounters was a good solid program for what it did, but the play it engendered was pretty limited, as you'd expect for the format. Something like AL would have been a good idea. hehe, yeah. 4e fixed a lot of stuff, and that is truly un-D&D like. Functional class balance is a huge part of it, and you are totally right that it has a big, though in a lot of ways subtle impact on the whole game. 4e does end up being a bit of its own sub-genre. One that seems badly served by RPGs in general these days. Really no other Fantasy RPG has exactly hit that point. I think DQ kinda tried, but it was just not that well-executed a game.The plethora of different and almost the same but overlapping mechanics disappointed me a lot. Sometimes we had to make do as well, but in those cases we'd always at least have some coins and half-inch ruled paper to sketch out the scene on. I did like wargames a lot back in that day, but RPGs were a LOT more popular, so we actually did fairly little real full-up wargaming. Most of what we did was Sea Power, Micro Armor, Star Fleet Battle Manual, and stuff like that.</blockquote>

Verification