Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5064895" data-attributes="member: 82106">Give it a play. I think you'll find the game plays VERY well in general. Classes are actually quite distinct and builds within a class can vary a huge amount. You'd hardly recognize a polearm master, a rapier wielding sword and board fighter, an axe wielding BRV fighter, and a dual scimitar swinging tempest fighter as the same class, though they have some features in common.Races are a matter of taste of course. The selection is good and I've found that all of the 4e races can be integrated into my setting in interesting ways. Not all of them are flawlessly designed but I'd have to say that the Half-Orc if there's a flaw in it is maybe they are TOO oriented towards melee combat builds, though not as much as the shifters who are totally pigeonholed. A Half-Orc chargebarian is a scary thing indeed! They sure aren't lacking or overshadowed in close combat roles.There are some differences in feel between 4e and 3.x for sure. There are different stylistic differences between 4e and older editions too. Not everyone likes that. Some people want to play exactly the way things were (not sure really why they complain about 4e though, there's plenty of older stuff around still). You may love or hate the style of 4e. Characters definitely are always from the start a bit "heroic" and level 1-3 is not quite the same degree of mucking your way up from practically an ordinary person. Still, level 1 characters can seem pretty limited when the DM wants to lay it on that way. It isn't the major style of 4e play but you can do a bit of the "we're just talented normal people" to start off a campaign.Really my feeling with 4e is that by fixing most of the really serious issues with earlier editions and putting the focus on story and action instead of realism or detailed subsystem mechanics that 4e has put all the burden of a good game onto the DM and players. A game works or not because of the way its played, not because of the rules. The system moves much more into the background and all of a sudden I think there are a lot of players out there that are finding they need to up their storytelling and RP skills. Oddly 4e seems to have been in theory designed to be easier for people to learn than even say 2e or 1e were but that didn't make a game that is friendlier to inexperienced players. Its almost the opposite. One could almost say this is in a sort of backward way the real failing of 4e. It takes a good bit of DMing talent to run 4e. I don't think that's because its harder to do what you could do in the past editions, its just capable of so much more. A bad encounter or a poor DM really stands out now. If you want to shine you really need to THINK hard about how to build an adventure, and even as a player you really want to think carefully about your character if you want to get the most out of the system.</blockquote>

Verification