Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 5619231" data-attributes="member: 22424">Actually, in many ways 4e isn't an evolution of the game - it's a revolution. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it is true nonetheless. Also, many of us who reject 4e did so after having looked into it and made an informed choice.Not really. Confirming crits was mechanically and mathematically sound design. The 4e approach is quicker, and certainly avoids that 'disappointment' of a failed confirmation, but it also has that nasty corner case where the monster's AC is exactly 20+attack bonus, and so every hit on the creature is an automatic crit.On balance, I agree that 4e has the edge. But it's not quite as clear cut as you suggest.What, subtraction? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I kid, of course - the "attack bonus" paradigm used by 3e and 4e is certainly an improvement. Still, talk about "learn(ing) a different level of mathematics" is hyperbole.Anyway, welcome to the board.</blockquote>