Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="teach" data-source="post: 4522387" data-attributes="member: 45322">Psion and Simon and Andor, I think you're absolutely right on the money with the idea that class abilities used to be balanced for the dungeon exploration, rather than with 4e, the encounter.&nbsp; Look at classes like the thief (oh look can't sneak attack this undead, but there's a trapped treasure chest that we'll need to open after the combat that you shoudl look at) or the bard (you'll be our face for role-playing encounters in return you'll spend your time buffing us in combat)Now, personally, I like the shift.&nbsp; I hated playing a thief in the AofW campaign because there was so much undead, but we needed one because of the traps.&nbsp; I also feel like it opens up the &quot;dungeon exploration&quot; aspect to more of the players around the table, because skills (pretty much the only non-combat abilities most characters have) seem to be well balanced between the classes.&nbsp; I could see though how people who played earlier editions with games that focused more on the exploration part than the combat part would be frustrated with exploration crunch and fluff.&nbsp; I think it's there (mostly in the skills section), just not in the places (class writeups) that it used to be. But I'm glad you said this psion and others, because it does help to explain to me what I like about 4e and the classes, and why some people who play the older versions don't like 4e.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="teach, post: 4522387, member: 45322"] Psion and Simon and Andor, I think you're absolutely right on the money with the idea that class abilities used to be balanced for the dungeon exploration, rather than with 4e, the encounter. Look at classes like the thief (oh look can't sneak attack this undead, but there's a trapped treasure chest that we'll need to open after the combat that you shoudl look at) or the bard (you'll be our face for role-playing encounters in return you'll spend your time buffing us in combat) Now, personally, I like the shift. I hated playing a thief in the AofW campaign because there was so much undead, but we needed one because of the traps. I also feel like it opens up the "dungeon exploration" aspect to more of the players around the table, because skills (pretty much the only non-combat abilities most characters have) seem to be well balanced between the classes. I could see though how people who played earlier editions with games that focused more on the exploration part than the combat part would be frustrated with exploration crunch and fluff. I think it's there (mostly in the skills section), just not in the places (class writeups) that it used to be. But I'm glad you said this psion and others, because it does help to explain to me what I like about 4e and the classes, and why some people who play the older versions don't like 4e. [/QUOTE]

Verification