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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6184651" data-attributes="member: 42582">I agree that PC build is a big part of 4e (and presumably 3E). I don't know that I'd say that's the whole purpose - more below.I agree that "heroic" depends on the surrounding setting, though the core architecture of no death spiral is a handy default starting point for a gonzo combat-oriented game.I don't know that I agree with the "treadmill" experience, which is linked to eking out power. I think the "character concept" notion is true to my experience. And it linkes fiddly PC build to fiddly action resolution - choosing the different parts of PC build isn't necessarily, even primarily, about powering up (though it can be), but rather about choosing which minutiae of action resolution the PC will interact with, and to what degree. And rationing these at PC build time is an element of rationing them during actual play.The closest that classic D&D play gets to this, I think, is the wizard. But the wizard's spells interacted less with minutia of action resolution, and were changed often enough (via memorisation) that they didn't really contribute to a "concept". D20 generalises build choices across all PCs, makes them more fiddly and technical (and does the same to action resolution) in pursuit of consistency and balance, and by making them central to build rather than changeable at will, contributes to the idea of "concept".At least, that's some of my thoughts on it.</blockquote>

Verification