Wait, seriously, figuring out that +4 strength and an increase to "large" size creates a net increase of +1 attack, +2 damage, +1 weapon die, is part of the "fun?" Like, just being told that wouldn't be as fun?
Really?
Oh yeah, totally. You're not experiencing it, so that means the problem doesn't exist for someone else!
Wait, seriously, figuring out that +4 strength and an increase to "large" size creates a net increase of +1 attack, +2 damage, +1 weapon die, is part of the "fun?" Like, just being told that wouldn't be as fun?
How does this bring the game to any sort of "screeching halt as they perform math"?
I've played my Eladrin Wizard to 12th level, and even at that level I have a good understanding of every power, feat, skill and item that I wrote on my character sheet. Not just for combat, but for role playing.
There is very little math involved, and it is a lack of understanding of character abilities that slows a game down.
I'm confused. You just made a reference to a 4e character (I presume) and I wasn't talking about 4e. I was talking about 3e. We have no issues with this in 4e. In fact, that was one of the things that really appealed to me about 4e.
In 3e when buffs were applied there was some math involved, progressively more as more buffs are added. It takes some time adding up those bonuses and their cascading effects. More often than not, this happened before combat so it meant there was a delay that many of us weren't fond of.
In addition, when a character gains a buff, it rarely comes from their own suite of abilities. What you are asking is that my fighter not only know what he does but what the whole range of wizard and cleric spells as well? Certainly, if the same buff is consistently cast upon him, that is possible. But I don't expect any player to know exactly what everyone else at the table is capable of doing.
This reminds me of a commercial for microwavable macaroni and cheese. The child that it is appealing to thought that boiling water was too difficult.
You might not be wrong. Of course, you might not be representative either.Hey. Hey. Hey. Hey.
In my opinion, you're wrong.
And you can't take that away from me.
:3c
No seriously I don't understand the sudden influx of people telling me I'm wrong. Uh, no. I'm not wrong. In m opinion, 3.5 was easier then 4e. You cannot prove me wrong. So why are you trying to?
Well, the snarky answer is that this is the internet. Welcome argument hell.No seriously I don't understand the sudden influx of people telling me I'm wrong. Uh, no. I'm not wrong. In m opinion, 3.5 was easier then 4e. You cannot prove me wrong. So why are you trying to?
Yes, yes. I can understand finding 3e fun. I just am not sure that actual human beings find the actual fun to reside in the fact that many spells and effects modified variables that seed other equations, resulting in cascading changes to the end-product stats you actually use.Someone who does not like spelling should not attempt a crossword puzzle, yet some people find them very enjoyable.
There is math and memorization involved with every edition of D&D, but there are ways to simplify it.