Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 4400376" data-attributes="member: 710">Thanks! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />In a way, 4E is doing both at the same time - everyone has its encounter related powers, and everyone has its daily powers. That solution could only work because the system was redesigned, of course. If you already have existing classes, and some class following the &quot;daily&quot; paradigmn and others do follow an encounter paradigm, your only choice to fix the conflict between the two by limiting yourself to only one.Of course, it is apparent that some players can find the watching part enjoyable if they know there will be a reward for them later when their character is needed. This doesn't only pertain to wizard vs fighter, but also with bards vs the whole rest, or say a Shadowrun Decker vs a Street Samurai.The question is - is this more rewarding to be useful all the time to them? And this is a question a player in this mindset has to ask himself when deciding what to look for in a game system.I am tempted to call this &quot;delayed gratification&quot; vs &quot;constant gratification&quot;.I don't think there is a &quot;generic&quot; answer. I would think that the latter is more common, or at least that's what the 4E design team assumed (possibly based on real data). (But this doesn't imply a value judgment.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mustrum_Ridcully, post: 4400376, member: 710"] Thanks! ;) In a way, 4E is doing both at the same time - everyone has its encounter related powers, and everyone has its daily powers. That solution could only work because the system was redesigned, of course. If you already have existing classes, and some class following the "daily" paradigmn and others do follow an encounter paradigm, your only choice to fix the conflict between the two by limiting yourself to only one. Of course, it is apparent that some players can find the watching part enjoyable if they know there will be a reward for them later when their character is needed. This doesn't only pertain to wizard vs fighter, but also with bards vs the whole rest, or say a Shadowrun Decker vs a Street Samurai. The question is - is this more rewarding to be useful all the time to them? And this is a question a player in this mindset has to ask himself when deciding what to look for in a game system. I am tempted to call this "delayed gratification" vs "constant gratification". I don't think there is a "generic" answer. I would think that the latter is more common, or at least that's what the 4E design team assumed (possibly based on real data). (But this doesn't imply a value judgment.) [/QUOTE]

Verification