Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mort" data-source="post: 3968453" data-attributes="member: 762">It's not a question of &quot;fun&quot; to play - all the classes could be very fun to play. It's a question of what would make the classes more fun to play - or shoring up the places where a class was &quot;no fun&quot; while still maintaining a challenging environment and ensuring a minimum of role infringement.Mostly, yes I agree but there were many other factors. As above, there is nothing wrong with trying to make fun classes even more fun to play.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; This question is overly leading and, more so, it's a strawman because it's stating that there are no drawbacks to character choice in 4th edition (even with the limited amount of info we have, this is blatantly untrue). &quot;Different drawbacks&quot; is not &quot;no drawbacks.&quot; (I like the above analogy of &quot;before it was -5 to 5 now it's 0 to 10&quot; and hope it proves apt for 4e.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; Love it or hate it - D&amp;D has a lot to do with combat. When gearing toward rules balance, the great majority of effort is, and should be, focused here. My understanding is that 4e tries to balance this out and also has a social resolution mechanic which should reward charismatic characters (we'll see how this plays out but at least they seem to be trying).&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; I hate the notion that as long as you're good at something you're balanced. This falls apart when somebody is good at something applicable 90% of the time and the other person is good at something applicable 10% of the time. And yes a good DM can make this work, but a good DM can cover up many sins attributed to any game system and should not be the bar to judge by.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; I DM'd almost exclusively for 3e and 3.5 but I did get to play some and had a blast with all the characters I did get to try (cleric, ranger, fighter/mage, warblade). The most fun I had was with a fighter/mage (played levels 5-12) and a warblade (2 sessions at level 10) - they key to both of these characters - little to no item dependency[edit: to add: but still a large number of fun options]! A trend they seem to be advocating in 4e.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mort, post: 3968453, member: 762"] It's not a question of "fun" to play - all the classes could be very fun to play. It's a question of what would make the classes [b]more fun to play[/b] - or shoring up the places where a class was "no fun" while still maintaining a challenging environment and ensuring a minimum of role infringement. Mostly, yes I agree but there were many other factors. As above, there is nothing wrong with trying to make fun classes even more fun to play. This question is overly leading and, more so, it's a strawman because it's stating that there are no drawbacks to character choice in 4th edition (even with the limited amount of info we have, this is blatantly untrue). "Different drawbacks" is not "no drawbacks." (I like the above analogy of "before it was -5 to 5 now it's 0 to 10" and hope it proves apt for 4e. Love it or hate it - D&D has a lot to do with combat. When gearing toward rules balance, the great majority of effort is, and should be, focused here. My understanding is that 4e tries to balance this out and also has a social resolution mechanic which should reward charismatic characters (we'll see how this plays out but at least they seem to be trying). I hate the notion that as long as you're good at something you're balanced. This falls apart when somebody is good at something applicable 90% of the time and the other person is good at something applicable 10% of the time. And yes a good DM can make this work, but a good DM can cover up many sins attributed to any game system and should not be the bar to judge by. I DM'd almost exclusively for 3e and 3.5 but I did get to play some and had a blast with all the characters I did get to try (cleric, ranger, fighter/mage, warblade). The most fun I had was with a fighter/mage (played levels 5-12) and a warblade (2 sessions at level 10) - they key to both of these characters - little to no item dependency[edit: to add: but still a large number of fun options]! A trend they seem to be advocating in 4e. [/QUOTE]

Verification