Quote:
Originally Posted by macd21
True, social interaction can be done freeform (and I prefer minimalist systems for social interaction myself). I was countering the statement that 4ed supports social interaction as much as it does combat.
|
Uhm... but I didn't even claim that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by macd21
4ed treats combat and non-combat interaction very differently. They are practically two different games.
|
No argument here, although I'd call it different subsystems rather than different games really. Though the majority of games also do that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by macd21
The impression I got from the reviewer was that he found this jarring and would have liked more support for non-combat interaction. I disagreed with the poster who stated that 4ed provides lots of non-combat support.
|
The impression I got from the reviewer was that he accused 4e of having, and I quote, "
no rules social interaction" (emphasis mine). Even though he happily admits ignoring the heftiest subsystem in the game that caters to this.
Are skill challenges perfectly worked out, whether pre- or post errata? No. Not in my opinion.
Could the game benefit from more social utility powers, feats, items, or other options. Yes. I'd welcome such a notion.
But the accusation that 4e has "no rules social interaction" is completely and self-evidently wrong. There
are rules, and not particularly light ones either in my book. Whether or not those rules are sufficient is an entirely different tangent you veered into and I never intended to touch upon.
If the reviewer had stated that he wasn't happy with skill challenges I would've agreed with him. I use the fan-made Obsidian system from ENWorld these days myself. If the reviewer had said the amount of social options are sparse compared to 3.x, I also would've agreed. But to say that there aren't any? Sorry, but's a lie I'm calling him on. A review shouldn't be about some quasi-houseruled version of a game. He's inventing problems himself to condemn the game with.