D&D General D&D Combat is fictionless

[Garthanos]

You really don't get it. These are never ISSUES for me. They are opportunities to have players really shine, each in their domain of choice.

When and if you want them to never of their own choice or when they come together with abilities that support each other in combos... just relying on crutches like anti-magic (also a game mechanic but yours as a dm)

 

[Garthanos]

To each his own and his fun, just stop trying to convince me that I need control through the game system. I don't. I have never needed it

Its all about your DM control and power right... never the player

 

[Garthanos]

and need a crutch like a very controlled game system here as a safeguard.

I have seen how you improvise tactical benefits in our discussions I would not trust you very far without some tool...

And the vast majority of 5e DMS here are utterly erratic about similar things, most erroring on the side of against the player.

 

[Lyxen]

No the player get to choose in 4e when the players want their characters to shine.

No, they don't, they have to abide by rules that tell them how many squares to move and how their powers are limited by combat. And it's exactly like this:

You get exactly that in comic books, by the way, superheroes are not equally powerful. But circumstances and plots allow them a chance to shine if they seize it.

Instead of only when you the DM decide for them with artificial leverage like anti-magic.

Yeah, right, artificial like a beholder eye that just targets powers because they have a technical tag, whatever source they come from.

Pray tell in which fantasy novel or movie you have something that feels like that. Because I have given you multiple examples of antimagic...

 

[Lyxen]

When and if you want them to never of their own choice or when they come together with abilities that support each other in combos...

Oh yes, you mean these very narrative powers of push/pull/slide and balls which are actually squares on the map. No, thanks, I'll take the narrative combos of my players any time over these, like yesterday evening when a player distracted a Prince of Hell while the other one rummaged around the back of the command tent trying to find hints about what had happened to the orders that the Prince should have received multiple times.

just relying on crutches like anti-magic (also a game mechanic but yours as a dm)

At least it's a narrative game mechanic that means something in the game world, and not something that exists only in the technical world of little squares on a technical map and that does only a purely technical effect that has no relation to what the different characters could do. It's really top-down levelling, reduce everyone to the lowest common denominator because one is afraid of the brilliant spikes.

Its all about your DM control and power right... never the player

My current game is a total sandbox. The players are in control of armies and have "allies" in hell, they decide whether they want to go in the areas where there is antimagic, or the path that they will take. But of course, in 4e, everything needs to be labelled and technically correct to be put on a gridded map, everything needs to be codified.

I have seen how you improvise tactical benefits in our discussions I would not trust you very far without some tool...

OK, this discussion is over. First, you dragged me back into edition warring with your insistence that it had to be only a matter of taste, and second this is actually extremely insulting. Have fun with your 4e, but stop trying to peddle it to everyone, it's dead out there for many good reasons (that of course you will never accept because all the people not agreeing with you are idiots for not seeing the light of 4e).

And the vast majority of 5e DMS here are utterly erratic about similar things, most erroring on the side of against the player.

Yeah, I know, we 5e DMs are all erratic and stupid, railroading DMs with no respect for the players. Riiiight....

 

[Garthanos]

No, they don't, they have to abide by rules that tell them how many squares to move and how their powers are limited by combat.

Game system is bad improvisation is the only good you are broken.
Also
sarcasm -> I have an idea let's give everyone 5 times as many squares and call the squares feet
LOL when you complain about limits of feet in the characters movement rate I will buy your bs.

Squares are just a simplification ffs.

And it's exactly like this:

That seems an irrelevant quote by a villain Thought you said as DM you aren't the villain.

 

[Garthanos]

Yeah, I know, we 5e DMs are all erratic and stupid, railroading DMs with no respect for the players. Riiiight....

Nope I think you were given a tool that is erratic like a crappy CR system and functionally zero guidelines about how skills and stunts might compare to abilities already provided explicitly. So when you go off the charts its highly unpredictable or predictably meh.

 

[Garthanos]

No, thanks, I'll take the narrative combos of my players any time over these, like yesterday evening when a player distracted a Prince of Hell while the other one rummaged around the back of the command tent trying to find hints about what had happened to the orders that the Prince should have received multiple times.

That is a normal narrative thing in 4e oh my and is the narrative which might well be backed by DM tool skill challenges.

 

[Lyxen]

Game system is bad improvisation is the only good you are broken.

This not english.

sarcasm -> I have an idea let's give everyone 5 times as many squares and call the squares feet
LOL when you complain about limits of feet in the characters movement rate I will buy your bs.

This just shows that you don't even understand the fact that the basis for 5e is ToTM, where there are not even squares, where you don't have to move in straight lines, and where you can actually go exactly where you want to be, even up or down along stairs and ladders (which 4e cannot even model properly, by the way). But that freedom is obviously too much for you to handle, even on maps without squares, although you know that VTTs have been doing it perfectly well for many years now.

Squares are just a simplification ffs.

No, they are a constraint that looks ugly and feels constrained, especially when you can't even apply pythagore. I don't want "simplification" I want to feel in a fantasy world where I can cover the same distance whether I run north or southwest, because otherwise it looks and feels dumb and only like a boardgame.

That seems an irrelevant quote by a villain Thought you said as DM you aren't the villain.

Just in case, this represents YOU, because it's you the one wanting everyone to be super in exactly the same way. I'll leave it to you to draw the conclusion as to who is the villain.

Nope I think you were given a tool that is erratic like a crappy CR system and functionally zero guidelines about how skills and stunts might compare to abilities already provided explicitly. So when you go off the charts its highly unpredictable or predictably meh.

And it's still way better than just parroting the rules of a combat boardgame and calling it a roleplaying game.

That is a normal narrative thing in 4e oh my and is the narrative which might well be backed by DM tool skill challenges.

Oh yes, forgot about this, crutch needed because the DM and players do not trust themselves, cannot handle improvisation, unusual situations and sandboxing. Everything needs to be controlled by little rules and rollplaying. Riiiight....

 

[Umbran]

It really looks like if, as a DM, you cannot trust your players...

I have seen how you improvise tactical benefits in our discussions I would not trust you very far without some tool...

Mod Note:

And, at this point, both of you are making it personal. As if annoying a person who disagrees with you by insulting them is going to actually help your position?

It is time for you folks to drastically change your approach to each other, or disengage.