Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BobTheNob" data-source="post: 5951662" data-attributes="member: 82425">(My eyebrows are furrowing as I try to think how to respond to this).The BIG criticism leveled as AEDU was homogenization. The concept that 4e achieved balance by moving classes into the AEDU power structure, and in doing so stripped them of there individuality. Thats the argument.You may disagree with it, but fact is that there is a whole section of the community who dont.I am part of the community that think 4e homogenized classes, and I came to that conclusion after playing a campaign that moved a party from 1st level to 28th over a 2.5 year period. I came to the conclusion during this campaign and then, AFTER independently coming to this concussion, found that alot of people out there agreed with me. I dont think 4e homogenized because other people do, and I dont think it homogenized because of theoretical musing and pointing at rule snippets. I think it homogenized because I personally saw and felt it happen during over the course of our campaign.Now, I agree, 4e did have differentiation between classes. I can read the rules even now and pluck out the elements. But what classes feel like during play is what matters.That is where I find this post casternating...because it is the exact diametric opposite of my experience. Classes were absolutely not distinct. Even my players were shrugging there shoulders at the lack of personnel identity by the end.Its strange how 2 people can have such very very different experiences.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BobTheNob, post: 5951662, member: 82425"] (My eyebrows are furrowing as I try to think how to respond to this). The BIG criticism leveled as AEDU was homogenization. The concept that 4e achieved balance by moving classes into the AEDU power structure, and in doing so stripped them of there individuality. Thats the argument. You may disagree with it, but fact is that there is a whole section of the community who dont. I am part of the community that think 4e homogenized classes, and I came to that conclusion after playing a campaign that moved a party from 1st level to 28th over a 2.5 year period. I came to the conclusion during this campaign and then, AFTER independently coming to this concussion, found that alot of people out there agreed with me. I dont think 4e homogenized because other people do, and I dont think it homogenized because of theoretical musing and pointing at rule snippets. I think it homogenized because I personally saw and felt it happen during over the course of our campaign. Now, I agree, 4e did have differentiation between classes. I can read the rules even now and pluck out the elements. But what classes feel like during play is what matters. That is where I find this post casternating...because it is the exact diametric opposite of my experience. Classes were absolutely not distinct. Even my players were shrugging there shoulders at the lack of personnel identity by the end. Its strange how 2 people can have such very very different experiences. [/QUOTE]

Verification