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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 4325968" data-attributes="member: 18">Cadfan - Whilst I'm reluctant to speak for others, I think the removal of the "uber face man" as you put it, means basically that no-one can choose as their area of speciality "being the face man".This is kind of similar, I guess, to how no-one can choose to be not-so-hot at combat in 4E. Everyone has to be potentially viable in combat, and everyone has to be potential viable in social situations, seems to be the 4E approach.4E provides on the very bare minimum of support for social stuff, like being able to have trained Diplomacy, Intimidate and so on, and I guess you could take Skill Focus. Wooo!Hey, here's another perspective:In 4E combat, you have four roles.In 4E social situations, you have one.Does that make more sense? In 3.XE, with less defined roles, it certainly seemed like in social situations, there were multiple roles, due to the way skills typically played out. What confuses me is why they didn't bother to do a similar thing to what they did in combat, in other situations. Like, it's one thing to give everyone something to do, but effectively they gave everyone the same thing to do. Maybe there should be some way of becoming the "Guardian" in social situations? Like, the NPCs focus on you, as the "face man", whilst another character verbally manuevers them and so on.I think 3.XE, with it's far far greater (even fairly early on) selection of socially-oriented or non-combat Feats and spells and magic items, and it's use of skill points, typically produced more complex and interesting social encounters than 4E does at this stage.Who knows, though, maybe we'll all get our "social class" (no pun intended) in some kind of poorly-named social situation supplement. I fear the adjectivenoun classes within it's pages!</blockquote>

Verification