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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5685551" data-attributes="member: 82106">OK, so how is this 4e's fault? Of course you CAN, if you try hard enough, make a character that isn't much good in combat. It requires a lot more than simply avoiding a few feats though. You say he had an 18 WIS. OK, so basically at that point there's no way by the rules that at level 1 he doesn't have 2 effective at-will attacks. If he can't use those effectively then the player is either not able to grasp basic combat techniques or someone is defining 'complete garbage' in an unrealistic fashion. In either case this is not a critique of the rules, and you will find that in ANY edition of D&D you can make a largely ineffective character.So, what you're saying is that it is 4e's fault that 3 of the 4 players in your game wanted to play in a different style than the 4th player and this made you all unhappy. This is a table issue and has not the slightest thing to do with the rules system. So the DM proceeded to make ill-advised hacks to 4e in an attempt to deal with yet another table issue (long fights) which I have in 3 years of running 4e not run into as a big issue (and again they can often happen in other editions too).There are tons of utility powers with applications outside of combat. Skills can do anything you want them to, and a perfectly good DC system and system for non-combat encounters was provided for exactly this purpose. You don't really say what rules you wanted that supposedly don't exist, so all we can say is maybe your style of playing doesn't match with 4e that well? I don't know. It works great for lots of us, but no game is perfect for everyone and 'tons of rules on how to adjudicate things' would probably spoil it for some of us.No, but it is also not 4e. First a druid isn't a striker, it is a controller. It isn't designed to do high damage. It is also absurd that an 18 WIS druid is going to be 'a hunchback'. This isn't a system issue, this is an issue where the player obviously didn't have the same goals as the rest of the players. Yes, the system IS good. I have yet to see an ineffective character and my players largely don't care to play optimization games. Heck, the rogue wields a bastard sword in my last game, and is still reasonably effective.So, all his powers are useless even though druids have a quite effective array of powers, and if the PC maintains his WIS and is given normal enhancements there is essentially no way he can be ineffective except he doesn't know how to use his powers and doesn't want to use them. I have news for you, no fiddling with feats is going to save this player from ineffectiveness. He just isn't interested in learning how to fight well, or he's being compared to some hard core min/maxers.If your DMs running of the game is so utterly and pathetically literalistic that "10,000 short swords is worth exactly 0gp" then what are we to say? This is a problem with the game rules? I'm sorry, this is another table issue. The DM is perfectly well empowered to decide for himself what you can sell something for and the rules are only a guideline which says basically "petty amounts of ordinary loot are basically worthless, don't bother." If you have 10k swords that's a story thing and there's never going to be a set of rules for the value of bulk lots of weapons.Yes, your deep insight reached that conclusion. Attack Powers are THERE to do things in combat. Combat is supposed to be an important part of the game and powers make it cinematic. Now, remove all the attack powers from your character sheet, you STILL HAVE TONS MORE STUFF on there than in all editions prior to 3.x and you have every option you had in 3.x to boot (though some of them may require you to have PHB2, PHB3, or MP2, etc). You also have a substantial number of powers (even attack ones) that have plenty of OOC uses. 4e is indeed DIFFERENT in the way it deals with this than 3.5, but then 3.5 basically gave most of this to only a few full caster classes, which many of us find quite lame.No, there is a perfectly good ritual which will let you fly at that level if you bothered to look. And why is it that 4e cannot do something slightly differently? If anything that isn't identical to 3.5 is bad, then go play 3.5. Heck you can even buy a nice new PF game that is almost exactly 3.5!Yes, you can't possibly RP in 4e without Weapon Expertise for free. LOL. Sorry, the issue isn't 4e, the issue is somewhere in the controlling mass of flesh between the book and the hand that rolls the dice....Yes, yes, anyone who designs a game and has a different opinion of game design and doesn't immediately admit that anything YOU don't agree with must be right and has to be changed instantly is 'treating you with contempt!' I got news for you, the world doesn't revolve around you. Grow up. People have different opinions and ideas about how things should be done, and they have different approaches to designing games. Not all of them work perfectly for everyone, nor can they. Not all players and tables work out well either. This is common and you have to learn to deal with it. Maybe dealing with it means playing a different game. So it goes. I have great fun with 4e, all this hand wringing about Expertise is at most a pimple, you CAN fix it, and if you don't like the way the CB works, DON'T BUY IT! If you don't like the way the game works, buy a different one! If you instead want to suggest to the people who designed 4e that they can do some things that will make you enjoy it, then by all means POLITELY talk to them. I'd suggest calling them sleazy, dumb, lazy, and arrogant are probably not likely to be successful.</blockquote>

Verification