Revisionist game publishing

[billd91]

Why not?

Because he's not a PC in a role playing game made to be color blind because full color vision would have made him "too good" to play. Unless someone out there really is playing "Pencils and Paychecks", but frankly, given the diversity of our experiences, I'm guessing we're more reflections of a generic point-buy system and your friend bought a 1 or 2 point quirk.

 

[Xris Robin]

How is it, then, that all NPC minotaurs, regardless of role or other abilities, have this ability, but PCs do not?

I note that you said you don't have a good grasp of the MM and don't play 4e. This is interesting, because it explains why you just asked a question that has no meaning. No NPC minotaurs have the Oversized ability, or use large weapons.

So, in fact, you have it in reverse. If the PC minotaur were using the MM stats (instead of the Dragon ones), rather than a minitaur... he's more of the mightytaur, since he can use larger weapons than NPC versions.

 

[catsclaw227]

If the PC minotaur were using the MM stats (instead of the Dragon ones), rather than a minitaur... he's more of the mightytaur, since he can use larger weapons than NPC versions.

I like to call these oversized using dudes MegaTaurs. But I think I like MightyTaur instead!

 

[pawsplay]

I note that you said you don't have a good grasp of the MM and don't play 4e. This is interesting, because it explains why you just asked a question that has no meaning. No NPC minotaurs have the Oversized ability, or use large weapons.

So, in fact, you have it in reverse. If the PC minotaur were using the MM stats (instead of the Dragon ones), rather than a minitaur... he's more of the mightytaur, since he can use larger weapons than NPC versions.

My impression is that monsters don't have weapon sizes at all... weapons are whatever size is described in their treasure. This may be another question without an answer, but how much damage does a monster do if you hand it one of the PCs' weapons?

 

[billd91]

No NPC minotaurs have the Oversized ability, or use large weapons.

I believe you are wrong there. In the MM, the basic medium-sized minotaur warrior may have a basic battleaxe for his size, but the medium cabalist has a great mace that does the same damage as a large-sized mace. The large savage minotaur has a greataxe that does the same base damage as a huge-sized greataxe. So, not using oversized weapons? I think use of oversized weapons is exactly where the designers got the base weapon damage from.

 

[Xris Robin]

I believe you are wrong there. In the MM, the basic medium-sized minotaur warrior may have a basic battleaxe for his size, but the medium cabalist has a great mace that does the same damage as a large-sized mace. The large savage minotaur has a greataxe that does the same base damage as a huge-sized greataxe. So, not using oversized weapons? I think use of oversized weapons is exactly where the designers got the base weapon damage from.

The Savage Minotaur does indeed do 2d8+7 damage with it's Greataxe. However, if you check the DMG, under the handy Creating Monsters section... the damage table says a level 16 monster should do... 2d8+7 damage. And the Cabalist's Great Cursed Mace does 1d10+6... exactly correct for a level 13 monster. Actually, to be entirely fair, the DMG suggests the Savage should be using High damage instead of Medium, because it's a brute. So it's damage should actually be 3d8+7. But it does 4d8+23 on a crit, so I think it still works out. Minotaurs do level appropriate damage, not weapon-based.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I suspect this moved away from the OP/title into some sorta odd pro-Simulation argument. Which is kinda shame, cause I think how much people are willing to accept a game that revises itself via patches and updated rules is actually interesting.

I find this interesting.

I think it's problematic from a partical point of view usually. Incorporating all the errata and revisions into my own books is almost impossible.

But thanks to the Character Builder or Monster Builder, it is really easy to deal with in 4E.

Overall I think a game greatly benefits when the designers are able to go back and fix mistakes they made quite a while ago. It allows to evolve the game continually with shorter cycles, without needing to put out new editions or "sub"editions (aka 3.5). Of course in the end you are still doing what you did with those, but you don't have to do it in big stacks. You don't have to worry about invalidating your old source books. You just update them as you go along.

Of course, the print version are kinda out-of-date. But 4E has all the tools you need to not have to refer to those books during play. You can print out your character sheet along with power cards that describes everything your character can do. DMs now have the monster builder to get up-to-date stat blocks.

And it's not as if they would "revise" the flavor text or the world description. This part remains.

 

[Garthanos]

The Savage Minotaur does indeed do 2d8+7 damage with it's Greataxe. However, if you check the DMG, under the handy Creating Monsters section... the damage table says a level 16 monster should do... 2d8+7 damage. And the Cabalist's Great Cursed Mace does 1d10+6... exactly correct for a level 13 monster. Actually, to be entirely fair, the DMG suggests the Savage should be using High damage instead of Medium, because it's a brute. So it's damage should actually be 3d8+7. But it does 4d8+23 on a crit, so I think it still works out. Minotaurs do level appropriate damage, not weapon-based.

Yup and further Fluff != stuff... it could sometimes be because of grunches humongous weapon and other times because of gargh hunts for vulnerable places and its all up to those playing the game. (Savagery implies the latter to me).

 

[ExploderWizard]

Overall I think a game greatly benefits when the designers are able to go back and fix mistakes they made quite a while ago. It allows to evolve the game continually with shorter cycles, without needing to put out new editions or "sub"editions (aka 3.5). Of course in the end you are still doing what you did with those, but you don't have to do it in big stacks. You don't have to worry about invalidating your old source books. You just update them as you go along.

Of course this reasoning assumes that everyone considers all changes and updates to be improvements. The issue with these upgrades being in electronic form is that they must be adopted 100% or not at all. One can pick and choose what to use from printed errata. The electronic updates work differently. You cannot adopt a change you like that came out in patch 4.019 without accepting patches 4.001-4.018 as well.

This factor contributes to the MMO feel. The MMO rules change at the behest of the designers. Players either accept these changes and upgrade or stop playing. D&D is a tabletop game and players are always welcome to use printed material only. The ponderously involved statblocks and character sheets make this choice impractical for many players so accepting the rules from on high is the path of least resistance.

 

[Garthanos]

The issue with these upgrades being in electronic form is that they must be adopted 100% or not at all.

Excluding or including "content" (even based on sources) those are easy and can be maintained and saved... or loaded for new characters. (this is different than changing the nature of content.

I agree not all changes are "enhancements"

I am annoyed by having to hunt through the whole bloody list of illegal feats to find the few that I house ruled to be legal for my campaign for instance on characters who have the Reapers touch feat who are not shadarkai.

Does that mean I cant do it? no but it means I have to go out of my way a little it makes the tool a little less useful and the more divergent I get from the "norm" and over time the tool gets less useful.... Unless over time they also change the tool to be better at adapting to house rules and customizations. Which I dont think they have succeeded on (yet).