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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Argyle King" data-source="post: 5617155" data-attributes="member: 58416">I'd respectfully disagree that 4E can be gritty.  At least not in the way I consider the word.  I don't feel (in my experience as a player) 4E can be deadly without the DM stacking the deck very heavily against the players or the players having characters which just work poorly together... sometimes one of those isn't enough; you need both.Another style I don't think it does well, is a game in which having a life outside of encounters matters a great deal.  Sure, I can roleplay till the cows come home; I would never deny that somebody can.  But, does the game give me the kind of feedback I want from that?  No, not really; I'm the type of person who gets into things like running a fief; gadgeteering a new invention, and many other things I'd like to do.  Getting a +2 bonus to a skill or being able to trade out one encounter power for another isn't what I'm looking for when I want to venture into these areas.  I'm the type of player who sat and wrote a back story and came up with a personality for my cohort in 3rd Edition.A third would be when I want to sit and really sink my teeth into worldbuilding, and have a solid 'physics engine' (for a lack of better words) upon which to craft my world.  I actually do this quite a lot; it's the type of world I prefer for when I want to do a sandbox game.A fourth would be when I want my heroes to be leading armies instead of fighting them.  To be fair, this is a problem I also had with 3rd Edition; I just did not know enough about the other rpg systems out there (at the time) to be aware of what other options I might have.  To clarify more, games in which someone who tries to fight an army probably dies quickly.  *For something like this, I tend to prefer a game without levels.*Oddly, enough, it is 4E which made me realize that I'd want a game without levels for that.  I appreciated the lessened power curve between levels.  I came to realize that I'd prefer to get rid of the concept of levels (as presented by D&D) completely for that style of game.How about if I want robust grappling options?  For a kung fu or martial arts themed game?  Sure, I could easily sit and do the work to come up with powers and classes based around 4E, but why when I could just pick up something else?Games in which combat isn't expected to be the main method of task resolution.  I am aware that 4E has skill challenges.  They are a very good idea; sometimes they even work in a way that seems somewhat satisfying.  However, in general, if I wanted a long term campaign in which I wanted noncombat to be put on an equal ground and be as equally supported as combat, I think I'd get bored very quickly with doing skill challenges all the time.  It's doable in 4E, but it's not satisfying to me, and the depth that I would want to explore isn't there.I have more, but I'll cut it short for right now.  I can't say that any of these are --strictly speaking-- impossible.  I would never claim that.  Only that, as I've already said, the game wouldn't function in a way that was very satisfying to me if I used 4E for most of these.edit:  I didn't see the last part of your post.  Keep in mind, I'm not comparing 4E to 3E when I mention these things.  As I alluded to in a previous post, I now currently favor a rpg which is not part of the D&D family.</blockquote>

Verification