Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Siuis" data-source="post: 4273100" data-attributes="member: 51622">Well, I have since changed my mind about it, as I've found the giddy joy at having new verandas to explore (i.e. not having a group consist of fey-touched LE sorceror/bards who all abuse the sacrifice system for some minor advantages, or whatever the fad for powerful characters might be this week) beats the sense of... Well, loss at looking at the classes.The reason it seems like an MMORPG is because each class role, out of the defender, controller, leader, and what ever the last one is, all seem to have similar powers. Every leader does an equal job of stacking bonuses and actions onto other party members. Every controller does an equal job of battlefield manipulation. Every assaulter (or whatever they are) does an equal job of being the spinning blade that the wizard wants to throw enemies into.This isn't actually true, from what little I've played, but the big issues seems to be that, using the Player's Hand Book alone, the number of options for character type dropped from hundreds to maybe ten. And now, it is almost impossible for someone with a contrary streak to play a bard who is a better fighter than the fighter, or a monk who is&nbsp; abetter sneak-attacker than the rogue. There is no ability to escape your &quot;role&quot; in the party, and that smacks of being shoe-horned into video game-esque linear play. We will have to see how it goes in the end, but this seems, to me, why there is so much in the way of dislike for 4e.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Siuis, post: 4273100, member: 51622"] Well, I have since changed my mind about it, as I've found the giddy joy at having new verandas to explore (i.e. not having a group consist of fey-touched LE sorceror/bards who all abuse the sacrifice system for some minor advantages, or whatever the fad for powerful characters might be this week) beats the sense of... Well, loss at looking at the classes. The reason it seems like an MMORPG is because each class role, out of the defender, controller, leader, and what ever the last one is, all seem to have similar powers. Every leader does an equal job of stacking bonuses and actions onto other party members. Every controller does an equal job of battlefield manipulation. Every assaulter (or whatever they are) does an equal job of being the spinning blade that the wizard wants to throw enemies into. This isn't actually true, from what little I've played, but the big issues seems to be that, using the [I]Player's Hand Book[/I] alone, the number of options for character type dropped from hundreds to maybe ten. And now, it is almost impossible for someone with a contrary streak to play a bard who is a better fighter than the fighter, or a monk who is abetter sneak-attacker than the rogue. There is no ability to escape your "role" in the party, and that smacks of being shoe-horned into video game-esque linear play. We will have to see how it goes in the end, but this seems, to me, why there is so much in the way of dislike for 4e. [/QUOTE]

Verification