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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ydars" data-source="post: 4325392" data-attributes="member: 62992">Fuzzlewump; I am not sure I am rejecting anything. I am just voicing an opinion. Something that certain people seem to feel very uncomfortable with. Your tone is unnecessarily aggressive, for no good reason that I can see.I think 4E feels like a wargame for a simple reason; 70% of the PHB is devoted to descriptions of class powers; powers that are usually only useful in combat. I have no doubt that, for reasons of space, much of  what we would consider core is yet to be published.3.5E could indeed be played as a highly tactical game, but it could also be played as a completely different kind of game where characters were not optimised for combat, but were characters to be played as characters. Because it had rules for everything, it could be played many different ways, much as earlier editions could.My issue with 4E is that it has removed most of the options for character creation and now if you don't fit one of the archetypes, then you can't create that character; illusionists, many types of cleric, casters focussing on charm and manipulation, thieves who use spells (using multi-classing). I am sure these holes will be filled in in time, but I am not comparing 4E to the entire 3,5E rule-set. I am comparing the so-called core mechanics; the only bit of 3,5E I really ever used.There are no rules for magical research, no rules for encumberance, no rules for crafting, the skill challenge system as written does not work, the equipment lists are very incomplete etc etc. It is hard to feel that the rest of D&D was given as much love as the combat system taking all this into account.Once these things are addressed I am sure this will be a great game and I intend to run and play it long before then. I just am trying to understand what it is about this game that does not immedately satisfy me.</blockquote>

Verification