Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ProfessorCirno" data-source="post: 5430603" data-attributes="member: 65637">This is all mechanics though.No doubt you can no longer use Great Cleave and 3e power attack in a non-3e edition.&nbsp; Nor can you make the hilariously terrible druid/ranger/wizard which would be utterly useless in 3e.But you know what?If you want to make a drow nature-wizard who has shapeshifting and lightning bolts?&nbsp; I can do that.&nbsp; Heck, that's basically yet another simple druid, albeit probably more of a Guardian then a Predator.In fact, that's a theme I'm seeing.&nbsp; For all the complaints that 4e is too mechanical, whenever the comparisons are brought up, it's pure mechanics.Know what?&nbsp; I did it earlier, I'll do it here.&nbsp; Tell me about your 3e character without using mechanics, and I can replicate it in 4e.&nbsp; Tell me about the multiclass character without refering to it by the multiclass mechanics.As much as I like 3e, I think it did something horribly vile to the game - it's not 4e that killed creativity, it's the insanely overranked rules of 3e.&nbsp; Suddenly you aren't dual wielding unless you're specifically using a dual wielding power.&nbsp; Suddenly you can't be a pirate unless you have the one specific pirate class.&nbsp; You can't change how the spell looks unless you have this one certain metamagic.&nbsp; It's this horrible idea that I simple cannot agree with that states &quot;You need mechanics to do something.&quot;&nbsp; As if not having a &quot;rope tying&quot; skill suddenly means everyone in the universe lost the ability to tie ropes.So yeah.&nbsp; Give me characters.&nbsp; Give me characters without being metagaming about it.&nbsp; Describe a character without using the mechanics - something you should be able to do in any edition, and something you had to do in earlier editions.&nbsp; I gurantee you can make a 4e character.&nbsp; Or a 3e character, or a 2e character, or so on, and so forth.&nbsp; But if all you see are mechanics and if you truly feel that everything needs a mechanic to go with it, then yeah, you won't like 4e.&nbsp; But you also won't like older editions, either.&nbsp; That's a 3e-ism through and through.&nbsp; And I gurantee your druid/wizard/ranger who polymorphs and throws lightning and dual wields wouldn't work too well in earlier editions, either.(I'm not even sure druid/wizard/ranger was an acceptable multiclass, at that.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ProfessorCirno, post: 5430603, member: 65637"] This is [B]all mechanics[/B] though. No doubt you can no longer use Great Cleave and 3e power attack in a non-3e edition. Nor can you make the hilariously terrible druid/ranger/wizard which would be utterly useless in 3e. But you know what? If you want to make a drow nature-wizard who has shapeshifting and lightning bolts? I can do that. Heck, that's basically yet another simple druid, albeit probably more of a Guardian then a Predator. In fact, that's a theme I'm seeing. For all the complaints that 4e is too mechanical, whenever the comparisons are brought up, it's pure mechanics. Know what? I did it earlier, I'll do it here. Tell me about your 3e character [I]without using mechanics[/I], and I can replicate it in 4e. Tell me about the multiclass character without refering to it by the multiclass mechanics. As much as I like 3e, I think it did something horribly vile to the game - it's not 4e that killed creativity, it's the insanely overranked rules of 3e. Suddenly you aren't dual wielding unless you're specifically using a dual wielding power. Suddenly you can't be a pirate unless you have the one specific pirate class. You can't change how the spell looks unless you have this one certain metamagic. It's this horrible idea that I simple [B]cannot[/B] agree with that states "You need mechanics to do something." As if not having a "rope tying" skill suddenly means everyone in the universe lost the ability to tie ropes. So yeah. Give me characters. Give me characters without being metagaming about it. Describe a character without using the mechanics - something you should be able to do in [B]any[/B] edition, and something you [I]had[/I] to do in earlier editions. I gurantee you can make a 4e character. Or a 3e character, or a 2e character, or so on, and so forth. But if all you see are mechanics and if you truly feel that everything [I]needs[/I] a mechanic to go with it, then yeah, you won't like 4e. But you also won't like older editions, either. That's a 3e-ism through and through. And I gurantee your druid/wizard/ranger who polymorphs and throws lightning and dual wields wouldn't work too well in earlier editions, either. (I'm not even sure druid/wizard/ranger was an acceptable multiclass, at that.) [/QUOTE]

Verification