Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dragonbait" data-source="post: 4488616" data-attributes="member: 29182">I want to know when At-Will powers were the sign of being very videogamy? Was it when Shadowrun allowed spells to be used at will? Or when Star Wars (D6) allowed their Force abilities to be used at will? Or when Warhammer mages in 2ed could use their spells at will? That concept has been around for decades, and just because it was never in D&amp;D before does not mean that they are very videogamy.&nbsp;As for encounter powers - Again, when they showed up in Star Wars SAGA edition, I heard people talk about the cinematic approach. Not the video game approach. &nbsp;As for daily - There were spell-like abilities that could be used 1/day. Sure, a fighter in previous editions didn't deal with that stuff, but they didn't deal with versitility at all, really (I stay where I am and attack with my weapon.. Just presume I do that for the next four rounds, too).&nbsp;As for monster &quot;types&quot; - well, it moved from a type determining hit dice, saves, skills, base attack bonus, and so on to type determining how they play. &quot;Psst, that's a giant. Hit him with something that requires a Reflex save. And he has the Fire subtype, hit him with a cold-based attack&quot; People call out the titles &quot;A gnoll clawfighter?! That's so videogamy. What if I want to have the PCs fight just a regular gnoll?&quot; Well, what if I went to 3ed or 2ed or 1ed and wanted the PCs to fight a regular human? There is no 1-hit die generic &quot;human&quot;. If a race is intelligent, why would it NOT have different combat skills, talents, and capabilities just like a human would?&nbsp;The minis and the grid - A MUST for 4e, IMO. But it was also a MUST for 3E IMO. I've met people who hate minis for reasons I can not fathom. I have tried mini-less combat in 3E, but realized I had to ditch a quarter of the rules (5-foot steps, movement, AoO from moving past enemies, and so on) to do it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dragonbait, post: 4488616, member: 29182"] I want to know when At-Will powers were the sign of being very videogamy? Was it when Shadowrun allowed spells to be used at will? Or when Star Wars (D6) allowed their Force abilities to be used at will? Or when Warhammer mages in 2ed could use their spells at will? That concept has been around for decades, and just because it was never in D&D before does not mean that they are very videogamy. As for encounter powers - Again, when they showed up in Star Wars SAGA edition, I heard people talk about the cinematic approach. Not the video game approach. As for daily - There were spell-like abilities that could be used 1/day. Sure, a fighter in previous editions didn't deal with that stuff, but they didn't deal with versitility at all, really (I stay where I am and attack with my weapon.. Just presume I do that for the next four rounds, too). As for monster "types" - well, it moved from a type determining hit dice, saves, skills, base attack bonus, and so on to type determining how they play. "Psst, that's a giant. Hit him with something that requires a Reflex save. And he has the Fire subtype, hit him with a cold-based attack" People call out the titles "A gnoll clawfighter?! That's so videogamy. What if I want to have the PCs fight just a regular gnoll?" Well, what if I went to 3ed or 2ed or 1ed and wanted the PCs to fight a regular human? There is no 1-hit die generic "human". If a race is intelligent, why would it NOT have different combat skills, talents, and capabilities just like a human would? The minis and the grid - A MUST for 4e, IMO. But it was also a MUST for 3E IMO. I've met people who hate minis for reasons I can not fathom. I have tried mini-less combat in 3E, but realized I had to ditch a quarter of the rules (5-foot steps, movement, AoO from moving past enemies, and so on) to do it. [/QUOTE]

Verification