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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Rechan" data-source="post: 3755535" data-attributes="member: 54846">The rules all ready tell you to do it. The point is that in 3e monsters fill roles and so do parties; the Designers are just being more up front about it. Monte Cook in one of his articles said that when they were designing 3e, they were taking cues from Magic: The Gathering. That is, they designed the system so that an experienced person looked at it and understood that Some THings were Better than Others. I.e. that if you look at the Toughness feat, you know it sucks. Or that if you have had enough experience in fights, you know that Whirlwind attack isn't that great. I think with 4e what they are doing is being up front. Everybody knows that an Ogre is a big dumb ftr that charges and hits people with a club. And 9 times out of 10, the ogre your DM runs is not going to sneak attack you. So why is it such a crime for the game to say "Ogres: Big dumb brutes in a fight"? The same with an Illithid - they are masterminds, they stand in the back behind some bodyguards and zap you - they don't whip out a sword and charge you. Stating that fact, and designing the Illithid to represent that, is not reducing it to a videogame, but designing it around its strengths.As it stands, the monsters and classes are just handed to you and WotC says "Figure it out for yourselves". In this instance they're making everything fit a little bit more cohesively and showing you how it fits. You can still have an Ogre rogue or an Illithid fighter, but they're geared towards what they are naturally, the same way that Wizards are geared towards blowing crap up and Fighters are geared towards using weapons to do damage.</blockquote>

Verification