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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="catastrophic" data-source="post: 5617402" data-attributes="member: 81381">I didn't quote you out of context you primadonna, I just snipped your post to save space. I cerrtainly didn't attack a point you didn't make, I was simply discussing broader the issue, starting with your post. I'm not trying to 're-sell' you on 4e or anything, but I will note for the sake of discussion that this is one of the key problems that they have been gradually fixing.  Early on monster design, particularly solo design, was simply too weak, and not effective against a solid deployment of afliction style effects in particular. IMC this led to dragons being a bit of a laughing stock, and when visiting a wizard's academy, I had to improv what was supposed to a 'deadly battle with an escape hydra' into 'overpower and subdue the hydra so the wizards can put it back in it's pen'.  Over time, WOTC have created better monsters, to the point where monster vault is really dramatically better in design than previous books, and you can see a clear progression from mm1, to 2, to 3, to the monster vault, with monsters getting better particularly in the area of survivability and damage, but also in other areas, like soldiers and lurkers getting better, more coherent mechanics.  It's also clearly part of their design process, and an attempt to experiment with some higher dps monsters.  Again, not to toot the 4e horn, but it is a more legible system, and in many cases, that can make bits that don't work, or bits that rub somebody the wrong way stick out like a sore thumb, if only to people who know the system.  That's part of why i'm not impressed by many of the criticisms made by the usual 4e-hating suspects- there's a clear gulf between the criticisms made by people who understand the system, or made a genuine effort to understand it, and people who do not. And yeah, there are some people who just got burnt out on it, or found it a bit 'meh', but when you look at the really strong criticism, the distinction is pretty clear. I dunno, if somebody said that about a 3e group, I guess I would accept that, or maybe i'd tell them to get a better game.  Either way, part of 4e is about getting the most out of a design. Sure, if that's what the group wants, and you really like playing, so be it. But if things are a bit more marginal than that, and the groups into it, it might be that youall collectivly 'fit' another system better. You mentioned playing another system, if that one doesn't suit the group, consider looking further afield.</blockquote>

Verification