|
Also, another potential motivation is that other people are doing it. One guy manages to get a good hold on somebody, nudges them into doing what they want regularly, and pretty soon other people are looking to get some skin in the game. Got to keep up with the Joneses, even if your guy's a useless sack of poo poo who argues constantly, needs regular infusions of power, and focuses on baubles, or, worse, fucks you up so consistently it's like he's doing it on purpose.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2014 16:46
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 00:53 |
|
The Belgian posted:I noticed the gargoyle rake in the monster vault. It's a level 5 monster. It gets resist 20 to all damage and +5 temp hp per turn in its stone form (it's also unable to do anything except leave stone form while in stone form). How could a level 5 party expect to defeat this if it goes to stoneform everytime its health gets low? I doubt a level 5 party could consistently deal enough damage to offset the resistance + regeneration. It's not even a solo monster. Temp HP never stacks, so it just ends every turn its in stone form with 5 THP. But I'd have to look closer to see just how bad it is.
|
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2014 19:31
|
|
Toph Bei Fong posted:I wrote a post in the 5e thread that's tangentially about this. Near as I can tell, it's Mearls being Mearls. That was a good post when I read it the first time, and it's a good post now.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 23:25
|
|
ImpactVector posted:The reason I've always thought 4e declined so hard is that the people that like(d) it are the people who value well-designed games. And while 4e is pretty drat good on that front, there are enough flaws that eventually they just start to wear on you once you've seen them. I don't think your second premise is true. Three of the broad tendencies of gamers have a game almost completely suited for them, one other tendency is indifferent to actual play, so we have to ask ourselves if the remainder are so underserved that 4e fails them completely.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2015 00:08
|
|
ImpactVector posted:What tendencies are you referring to? The ones from the DMG, but I can only remember the names Robin Laws used for them ATM.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2015 00:36
|
|
Chernobyl Peace Prize posted:I think Attorney at Funk said it best in another thread, that the problem with 4e (that led to statements like the above) is that 4e is the first D&D to most transparently express the truth that's been present in all D&Ds prior: your character, as far an RPG rules set is concerned, is a collection of mechanics. When they're well-designed, or presented within a consistent system, it peels aware the layer of self-deception that lets a person think that roleplaying is something inherent to the sheet or system to begin with. Which understandably rustles some jimmies when you're a lot more used to, and comfortable with, being lied to. I think there's also the whole "3e/d20 is a universal system" thing, which I remember a lot of people buying into back in the day.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2015 17:52
|
|
starkebn posted:most people who say they can't roleplay in 4e are probably saying it because you can't just write wizard on your character sheet and have a million spells to cast out of combat that effect everything around you I don't think so, Tim.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2015 01:23
|
|
starkebn posted:How is roleplaying any more or less supported in 4e compared to other editions? That's not what I said. I said that I didn't believe that people say "you can't roleplay in 4e" because they view having utility spells as roleplaying. I think CPP/AaF's idea that it's because 4e made the mechanics much barer than they had been in previous editions is probably more likely, (along with, probably, contamination from GNS and 90s White Wolf, the marketing of d20 as the end of roleplaying games, etc.) but even if it isn't, I have read a lot of edition warring in my time and people didn't, don't make it all about casters when they talk about roleplaying. Indeed, they often explicitly complained about wizards/clerics being nerfed alongside complaints about how you can't roleplay.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2015 04:17
|
|
Unknown Quantity posted:What do you do when a party may potentiaally be too well-oiled a machine to really make something hard for without just dipping into realms of the ridiculous territory like massively overr-huge numbers? As in, when you want to make the fights hard and memorable but don't want to just keep upping the numbers if they keep winning. Alter the stakes in a way that doesn't rely on numbers. Hostages, timers, things that need to be regularly attended, etc. Make the assumption that monsters are all going to get splatted in short order, and then use them as distractions or as delays rather than as something that forces a losing condition.
|
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2015 17:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 00:53 |
|
Gharbad the Weak posted:Well, they released the 5th edition SRD. There was a 4E SRD, but it didn't reproduce the essential text, only covers PHB 1 and 2, AV, MM 1 and 2, and DMG 1, and is fairly expressly just a list of the things you can include verbatim in a licensed product, rather than a way to play the game almost entirely for free. So, in retrospect, it's not surprising that they've decided to forgo that for 5th.
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2016 19:48
|
|