Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Wik" data-source="post: 5465306" data-attributes="member: 40177">Yeah, and this happens - try out new mechanic ideas in a different product line to give them a trial by fire where it's no harm no foul if they fail.But if we look at what 2e was the day before 3e came out, and what 3e was the day before 4e came out, the differences still make 4e vastly different in playstyle from 3e than 3e was from 2e (if that sentence makes sense!).After all, in the &quot;last day&quot; of 2e, we had skills and powers + combat and tactics, which had (among other things) flexible skill systems, flexible races, opportunity attacks, various combat actions, and all those D&amp;D spells.&nbsp; To put it basically, when we first played 3e, we still knew the basics of making a character, and our first characters for the system were actually pretty decently built.&nbsp; When 4e came out, it pretty much got rid of the idea of a vast number of &quot;utility&quot; actions outside of a fight.&nbsp; It changed the way combats are played almost to the core.&nbsp; It felt for us like we were playing a completely new game... and our first characters, built using tried-and-true D&amp;D methods (spread your ability points out a bit), were pretty much useless.&nbsp; I really do think 4e is a complete break from the previous editions of D&amp;D in many, many ways, which is probably why there's a significant backlash towards it.&nbsp; While I play a 4e game every week, there are many times where I just have to shake my head in silent frustration with how parts of the game play out.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Wik, post: 5465306, member: 40177"] Yeah, and this happens - try out new mechanic ideas in a different product line to give them a trial by fire where it's no harm no foul if they fail. But if we look at what 2e was the day before 3e came out, and what 3e was the day before 4e came out, the differences still make 4e vastly different in playstyle from 3e than 3e was from 2e (if that sentence makes sense!). After all, in the "last day" of 2e, we had skills and powers + combat and tactics, which had (among other things) flexible skill systems, flexible races, opportunity attacks, various combat actions, and all those D&D spells. To put it basically, when we first played 3e, we still knew the basics of making a character, and our first characters for the system were actually pretty decently built. When 4e came out, it pretty much got rid of the idea of a vast number of "utility" actions outside of a fight. It changed the way combats are played almost to the core. It felt for us like we were playing a completely new game... and our first characters, built using tried-and-true D&D methods (spread your ability points out a bit), were pretty much useless. I really do think 4e is a complete break from the previous editions of D&D in many, many ways, which is probably why there's a significant backlash towards it. While I play a 4e game every week, there are many times where I just have to shake my head in silent frustration with how parts of the game play out. [/QUOTE]

Verification