Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Gencon: Any non-Essentials content coming up?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 5653577" data-attributes="member: 87792"><p>If and only if you mysteriously assign the same overhead to an option to change things that need not be taken, and a certainty of changing things. This simply isn't so. The default "not change" works.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Congratulations. You have just demonstrated that every filing system known to man makes decisions more complicated than not having a filing system. More decision points and fewer options at each decision point is quite simply easier to manage than just laying out as many options as possible all at the top level. This is why we have filing systems. This is why we categorise.</p><p></p><p>There is a limit to the number of options that the human brain can process at once in the short term memory. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magical_Number_Seven,_Plus_or_Minus_Two" target="_blank">Seven plus or minus two is the normal human rule of thumb</a>. And how people group matters a lot (which is why we use mnemonics to aid memory). There is also research that <a href="http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?GrandMasterEliminatesWrongMoves" target="_blank">one difference between a grandmaster and an unskilled one is that grandmasters don't see the wrong moves</a>. And from my own experience of playing chess this fits (I was far from a grand master but not bad at all).</p><p></p><p>Now you almost certainly see the right moves. You are a skilled player. It's simple for you. And for me. But in classic AEDU, the at will and the choice of target are made as part of the same action.</p><p></p><p>Assume a seventh level fighter (i.e. just had the third stance and third encounter attack power) and no daily powers. Assume four possible targets.</p><p></p><p>Decision tree for e-class goes like this.</p><p>1: Which stance do you want? (3 options)</p><p>2: Who do you want to attack? (4 options)</p><p>3: Do you wish to Power Strike? (2 options)</p><p></p><p>Yes, there are 24 options there on the table. But at no point does the actual list the PC needs to face exceed four (except on the move action). All three can be done <em>fast</em>.</p><p></p><p>Decision tree for non-e class goes more like this.</p><p>1: Who do you wish to attack (4 options) and with what (5 options)? These multiply for <em>twenty</em> different options on the same decision point. Yes, 20 is less than 24. But that's 20 options to sort through at once. That's hideous.</p><p></p><p>Before you mention breaking out a burst is one option, not four, you are right - but on the other hand a power like Hack and Hew that hits two targets gives six combinations of two targets on its own (and would be 12 if there was a difference between the attacks).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Name the class with seven stances please. (Unless you've grabbed stances with utility powers). Even thieves only get tricks at levels 1, 1, 4, 7, and 17 for five. That sounds like pedantry until you remember the Seven Plus Or Minus Two rule above.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Until you have the decision point thrown in.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Apparently in your world there is no difference between playing <em>sub optimally</em> and sticking your underpants on your head, your pencils up your nose and saying "wibble".</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Where a fraction of a percentage point for the Barbarian vs Slayer comparison includes a +1 to hit. Which is about 7% on its own. More at higher levels. (Especially as you are having less trouble with encounter powers as a Slayer due to the changed decision point). A slayer outperform a non-raging Barbarian (and he outperforms th slayer when raging). But at low levels where I made my comparison, you don't do much more than At Will Spamming. At higher levels the gap grows until you take dailies into account (especially with the right bracers being lower level).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes. Unconsciousness ends stances and auras. Your point? If knights are attacked while unconscious they don't have stance or aura running. This is about the one time it drops by RAW without basic precautions. ANd honestly, marks and defender auras dropping with unconsciousness is <em>good</em> thing. Or are you talking about night attacks here and catching the PCs asleep when most warrirors, Fighter or Knight, will be crippled by <em>having taken their armour off?</em></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Sorceror is a separate class from wizard. I'm expecting something along the lines of elemental stances and two attacks - single target and burst 1. Not a further build of Mage (which is utterly indistinguishable from an AEDU class for obvious reasons). I want to be able to hand out a blast mage to people who aren't mechanically gifted.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 5653577, member: 87792"] If and only if you mysteriously assign the same overhead to an option to change things that need not be taken, and a certainty of changing things. This simply isn't so. The default "not change" works. Congratulations. You have just demonstrated that every filing system known to man makes decisions more complicated than not having a filing system. More decision points and fewer options at each decision point is quite simply easier to manage than just laying out as many options as possible all at the top level. This is why we have filing systems. This is why we categorise. There is a limit to the number of options that the human brain can process at once in the short term memory. [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magical_Number_Seven,_Plus_or_Minus_Two]Seven plus or minus two is the normal human rule of thumb[/url]. And how people group matters a lot (which is why we use mnemonics to aid memory). There is also research that [url=http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?GrandMasterEliminatesWrongMoves]one difference between a grandmaster and an unskilled one is that grandmasters don't see the wrong moves[/url]. And from my own experience of playing chess this fits (I was far from a grand master but not bad at all). Now you almost certainly see the right moves. You are a skilled player. It's simple for you. And for me. But in classic AEDU, the at will and the choice of target are made as part of the same action. Assume a seventh level fighter (i.e. just had the third stance and third encounter attack power) and no daily powers. Assume four possible targets. Decision tree for e-class goes like this. 1: Which stance do you want? (3 options) 2: Who do you want to attack? (4 options) 3: Do you wish to Power Strike? (2 options) Yes, there are 24 options there on the table. But at no point does the actual list the PC needs to face exceed four (except on the move action). All three can be done [I]fast[/I]. Decision tree for non-e class goes more like this. 1: Who do you wish to attack (4 options) and with what (5 options)? These multiply for [I]twenty[/I] different options on the same decision point. Yes, 20 is less than 24. But that's 20 options to sort through at once. That's hideous. Before you mention breaking out a burst is one option, not four, you are right - but on the other hand a power like Hack and Hew that hits two targets gives six combinations of two targets on its own (and would be 12 if there was a difference between the attacks). Name the class with seven stances please. (Unless you've grabbed stances with utility powers). Even thieves only get tricks at levels 1, 1, 4, 7, and 17 for five. That sounds like pedantry until you remember the Seven Plus Or Minus Two rule above. Until you have the decision point thrown in. Apparently in your world there is no difference between playing [I]sub optimally[/I] and sticking your underpants on your head, your pencils up your nose and saying "wibble". Where a fraction of a percentage point for the Barbarian vs Slayer comparison includes a +1 to hit. Which is about 7% on its own. More at higher levels. (Especially as you are having less trouble with encounter powers as a Slayer due to the changed decision point). A slayer outperform a non-raging Barbarian (and he outperforms th slayer when raging). But at low levels where I made my comparison, you don't do much more than At Will Spamming. At higher levels the gap grows until you take dailies into account (especially with the right bracers being lower level). Yes. Unconsciousness ends stances and auras. Your point? If knights are attacked while unconscious they don't have stance or aura running. This is about the one time it drops by RAW without basic precautions. ANd honestly, marks and defender auras dropping with unconsciousness is [I]good[/I] thing. Or are you talking about night attacks here and catching the PCs asleep when most warrirors, Fighter or Knight, will be crippled by [I]having taken their armour off?[/I] Sorceror is a separate class from wizard. I'm expecting something along the lines of elemental stances and two attacks - single target and burst 1. Not a further build of Mage (which is utterly indistinguishable from an AEDU class for obvious reasons). I want to be able to hand out a blast mage to people who aren't mechanically gifted. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Gencon: Any non-Essentials content coming up?
Top