Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MrMyth" data-source="post: 4519385" data-attributes="member: 61155">I don't know about that - it really is a highly subjective matter. &nbsp;For myself, I've found roleplaying significantly more supported by 4E - between the much better advice on running games in the DMG, the encouragement to allow player creativity, putting greater narrative control in player's hands, the presence of genuine mechanics for dealing with non-combat encounters, and the ability to embrace character concept and build characters in a way that feels natural instead of having to be forced into absurd optimized builds in order to be viable playing the game. 3rd Edition, in my experience, was the game that dismissed RP in return for more combat time. &nbsp;But... that is just my opinion. I know others who loved the greater simulationism, the thoroughness of the details in character construction and world-building, the greater diversity of skills and features, the greater distinction between melee and spell systems and the flavor that brought - and for them, 3rd Edition was far more useful for RP. &nbsp;Both systems have their advantages and disadvantages for roleplaying. Some will prefer one over the other, and that's ok. &nbsp;That said, I do think you are very mistaken to state that 4E in any way implies that RP should take a backseat to combat, or discourages it in any fashion. Both games provide plenty of support for roleplaying... which, in the end, is something entirely driven by the players and the DM. &nbsp;You can certainly feel free to prefer the RP strengths of 3rd Edition over those of 4E - but if you genuinely think it somehow looks down on roleplaying, I really think you are viewing it through a biased lens and giving an extraordinarily incorrect description of the game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MrMyth, post: 4519385, member: 61155"] I don't know about that - it really is a highly subjective matter. For myself, I've found roleplaying [I]significantly[/I] more supported by 4E - between the much better advice on running games in the DMG, the encouragement to allow player creativity, putting greater narrative control in player's hands, the presence of genuine mechanics for dealing with non-combat encounters, and the ability to embrace character concept and build characters in a way that feels natural instead of having to be forced into absurd optimized builds in order to be viable playing the game. 3rd Edition, in my experience, was the game that dismissed RP in return for more combat time. But... that is just my opinion. I know others who loved the greater simulationism, the thoroughness of the details in character construction and world-building, the greater diversity of skills and features, the greater distinction between melee and spell systems and the flavor that brought - and for them, 3rd Edition was far more useful for RP. Both systems have their advantages and disadvantages for roleplaying. Some will prefer one over the other, and that's ok. That said, I [I]do [/I]think you are very mistaken to state that 4E in any way implies that RP should take a backseat to combat, or discourages it in any fashion. Both games provide plenty of support for roleplaying... which, in the end, is something entirely driven by the players and the DM. You can certainly feel free to prefer the RP strengths of 3rd Edition over those of 4E - but if you genuinely think it somehow looks down on roleplaying, I really think you are viewing it through a biased lens and giving an extraordinarily incorrect description of the game. [/QUOTE]

Verification