Quote from: Halloween Jack;533804So, Jeff, do you have any opinions about Dungeons & Dragons, the forthcoming "D&D Next" edition thereof, or wildly popular retroclone Pathfinder?

Oh, I have plenty of opinions.

However, you are just desperate to try and change the direction of the thread that you tried so hard to shit up in the first place.

Quote from: The Butcher;533744So sex is a martial power??? :confused:

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon!

Quote from: Marleycat;533766This really does clinch it, the 4venger vaunted love of literal class balance and insisting it makes for a good rpg.

Are you saying only class imbalance makes for good rpgs?

Quote from: Sommerjon;533832Are you saying only class imbalance makes for good rpgs?

Please read what I said carefully and think about it. Then you have your answer.

Quote from: Sommerjon;533832Are you saying only class imbalance makes for good rpgs?

It looks like she's saying class balance alone doesn't make for a good rpg.

In fact, she didn't use the word "only" (or an equivalent) at all in what you quoted, so I'm not sure where you got that from.

Actually that's part of it but the more important part is, I don't think symmetrical class balance works for a rpg. I think classes should be asymmetric and balanced accordingly like before 4e. Classes should not have all the same powers or built the same way and so on. Each basic archetype should have a particular strength and weakness with overall balance accounting for that.

Quote from: Marleycat;533846Actually that's part of it but the more important part is, I don't think symmetrical class balance works for a rpg. I think classes should be asymmetric and balanced accordingly like before 4e. Classes should not have all the same powers or built the same way and so on. Each basic archetype should have a particular strength and weakness with overall balance accounting for that.

Hahahahaha asymmetric balance oh my you are so adorable.

Also hahahahahahahahaha classes not being built the same way. Please, name me an edition where classes aren't built the same way, please do! Oh, wait, wait, you can't because classes are built the same way! It's just some started to get more powerful over time and somehow nerds have this fantasy that writing 'Wizard' or 'Cleric' or whatever on your character sheet is a valid excuse for extra narrative control.

You are what is wrong with gaming. In cooperative gaming an equal level of control over the flow of the game is simply good design; simply because it was done differently before doesn't make it good. If you want a poorly-balanced mess of a game, play 3E, don't ask 5E to cater to shitty design just because it's shitty design that you like.

Ah, looks like I will need a bigger bottle.

Oh look, the other shithead has shown up.

Quote from: Darwinism;533908Hahahahaha asymmetric balance oh my you are so adorable.

Also hahahahahahahahaha classes not being built the same way. Please, name me an edition where classes aren't built the same way, please do! Oh, wait, wait, you can't because classes are built the same way! It's just some started to get more powerful over time and somehow nerds have this fantasy that writing 'Wizard' or 'Cleric' or whatever on your character sheet is a valid excuse for extra narrative control.

You are what is wrong with gaming. In cooperative gaming an equal level of control over the flow of the game is simply good design; simply because it was done differently before doesn't make it good. If you want a poorly-balanced mess of a game, play 3E, don't ask 5E to cater to shitty design just because it's shitty design that you like.

Wow, I feel honored I leveled up to the trolls calling me "adorable", question did you expect a serious response to that so called post trying to totally ignore what I actually said?  Seriously I'm confused.

Remember everyone, because X problem exists in 3ed, 4ed is automatically good.

Quote from: Daztur;533931Remember everyone, because X problem exists in 3ed, 4ed is automatically good.

I prefer the alternative, "4e fixed all these problems in D&D so it's the best" when they conveniently ignore that in the first 25 years of D&D, those "problems" never existed to begin with.  It's like, "4e is better than 3e, so that means it's the best version ever."

Quote from: Daztur;533931Remember everyone, because X problem exists in 3ed, 4ed is automatically good.

Damn, what is it with the black and white that 4vengers adhere to? Not 4e fans but that subset, they've so fanatical. Every version before 3e is asymmetric design and most of 3e is. Are they really that clueless about the game before 2000AD?

Quote from: Darwinism;533908Please, name me an edition where classes aren't built the same way, please do! .

What do you define as "built the same way?"  That they all need xp to gain in levels, and with each level, you get more HP?  Because that's about the only similarity in all D&D prior to 4e.

Classes gain in power in completely different intervals that have no correlation whatsoever.  Some classes has magic, some do not. Some get really good in combat, while others do not.

The way I'm reading MC's post that you quoted is that she disagrees that every time ANY classes levels, the level of power increase is the same as every other class, and that random Level 4 class character is the exact same power level as random level 4 class character next to them.  All classes have X amount of dailies and per encounters and powers.  And I happen to agree with MC that that isn't needed.

Quote from: Marleycat;533938Damn, what is it with the black and white that 4vengers adhere to? Not 4e fans but that subset, they've so fanatical.

4vengers don't play D&D because 4E is a game, they play 4E because it is their religion. Kinda like how an old science fiction writer created the cult of scientology.

And no, 4E fans are not 4vengers.