Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5531488" data-attributes="member: 82106">I think the problem is there are 2 VERY VERY different ways of approaching the concept of utility in a game like 4e.For instance a Vampire to me has maximum utility when it most thoroughly evokes the concept of being a vampire. If it doesn't do that it is literally worthless because all it is is a name and some random mechanics applied to it. The CONCEPT has to be supported. It MUST feel like a vampire or it is 'broken'. How well it works in a min/maxing optimizer sense as the best mechanical choice for making a character fight well is utterly irrelevant if it doesn't first and foremost do the job of supporting my "my character is a vampire" concept. The HoS vampire appears (not having run the thing I'm not certain, but I suspect from looking at it) to do a pretty decent job of evoking a vampiric character.Now, I don't disagree that it is good for characters to be as mechanically equal despite thematic choices as possible. In the case of the vampire it is a bit tricky to tell. Yes it will be helpful to have some experience playing the game, but I think any reasonably intelligent player who takes the time and has a decent grasp of 4e healing mechanics and how encounters work will pretty quickly figure out a viable way to play the character. It IS an advanced sort of character, not every shlub is going to play this sort of PC. I'm not trying to be elitist but I don't really feel that it is necessary for every dark niche and cranny of the game to be entirely transparent to rank newbies as long as they have plenty of variety of good options they can figure they'll be happy and the more sophisticated player can play his vampire and it will be fine. Again I wouldn't take that concept TOO far, but within reason it can actually add a bit to the game.Now, is the HoS vampire ACTUALLY a good solid design? Is there an obvious way to make something better? I don't really like to second guess the designers, especially on something I've only played with in theorycraft effectively. I CAN think of things that might have broadened the concept and the idea of making it a theme is tempting, but it is quite possible these things were explored and dropped by the dev team for perfectly good reasons that aren't apparent to me in my armchair.I could repeat the above for the shade but I won't. I tend to agree that the shade needs a better racial power implementation than it has, but even good well-written material isn't perfect, and I've never accused WotC of being perfect either. I still think the book is chock full of very good stuff (and fortuitously my campaign took a sharp left turn into shadowy matters lately so it is something I am going to get some good mileage out of in the next couple months too).In other words from my perspective material needs to be evocative, otherwise I might as well be playing solitaire or Cosmic Encounter. We RPG to ROLE PLAY. The game aspect is significant but 4e luckily is very strong there and I am FAR from convinced that HoS is going to give us any real issues there that come even close to obviating its nice evocative content.</blockquote>

Verification