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
*TTRPGs General
Rule-of-Three: 06/19/2012
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="Dragoslav" data-source="post: 5949759" data-attributes="member: 6690267"><p>1) You may be right, and that's why I would prefer simple combat rules for TotM over a fiddly, rules-heavy system that lacks flavor. And before anyone makes any snarky comments, I do not consider 4e to be a "fiddly, rules-heavy system." <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> As far as I'm concerned, 4e is a nice medium between not enough rules and too many rules. I've played actual tactical minis wargames before, and that's what I consider to be the "fiddly, rules-heavy" end.</p><p></p><p>That being said, I enjoy the finesse of having an ability that specifically says "your ally takes the damage instead of you" instead of trying to convince the DM to let me duck behind an ally when an enemy attacks on its turn.</p><p></p><p>Lastly, consider the Warlord ability I mentioned, too. How do you convince the DM in TotM gameplay to let you 1) dash over to an enemy that just struck down your ally off your turn, 2) deal extra damage, 3) heal the ally as a result, and 4) heal extra HP based on how many hits you took on the way?</p><p></p><p>It's one thing to have tactical rules for charging, etc., but you don't get all of the nifty riders on top of such actions like you do with 4e powers.</p><p></p><p>2) As I mentioned above, it's not "simplicity" I'm worried about in the tactical combat module, it's a system bogged down with rules and an emphasis on fiddly bits over character and flavor that concerns me. If I wanted to worry about facing, I'd play Warmachine. For cinematic, fantasy combat, I go with 4e.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dragoslav, post: 5949759, member: 6690267"] 1) You may be right, and that's why I would prefer simple combat rules for TotM over a fiddly, rules-heavy system that lacks flavor. And before anyone makes any snarky comments, I do not consider 4e to be a "fiddly, rules-heavy system." :) As far as I'm concerned, 4e is a nice medium between not enough rules and too many rules. I've played actual tactical minis wargames before, and that's what I consider to be the "fiddly, rules-heavy" end. That being said, I enjoy the finesse of having an ability that specifically says "your ally takes the damage instead of you" instead of trying to convince the DM to let me duck behind an ally when an enemy attacks on its turn. Lastly, consider the Warlord ability I mentioned, too. How do you convince the DM in TotM gameplay to let you 1) dash over to an enemy that just struck down your ally off your turn, 2) deal extra damage, 3) heal the ally as a result, and 4) heal extra HP based on how many hits you took on the way? It's one thing to have tactical rules for charging, etc., but you don't get all of the nifty riders on top of such actions like you do with 4e powers. 2) As I mentioned above, it's not "simplicity" I'm worried about in the tactical combat module, it's a system bogged down with rules and an emphasis on fiddly bits over character and flavor that concerns me. If I wanted to worry about facing, I'd play Warmachine. For cinematic, fantasy combat, I go with 4e. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Rule-of-Three: 06/19/2012
Top