Search results

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=220478 This thread is a good example of my point. Two pages of spells are released. Hong and Fourthbear cheer that wizards are nerfed (assuming that these two pages mean they are). This is no different from the OP complaining about all the damage spells...

And some people are saying "I like what I haven't see so far." The two sides of the argument are perfectly symmetric. Every time someone says they like 4e, they are assuming just as much as the OP. You are holding the anti 4e crowd to a high burden of proof than the pro 4e crowd.

It sounds like he's trying to conflate all the hassle of knowing many powers to the hassle of having to remember whether or not you've used a power. But I think the real important point here is that he's revealed a bit of information about how slowly classes accumulate new powers.

I'm pretty sure scrolls as we know them are dead: they don't fit in with the 4e pricing structure at all. Your idea for scrolls seems like a workable replacement.

Where are you getting this information? EDIT: Found it in the Paizo thread:

Pages.

I'm hopeful that they're making proficiency less important. And this would be consistent with the 4e design axiom of replacing penalties with bonuses.

That's an interesting criticism but I believe your situation is not supported by evidence: feat names were as simple as I'm asking for in 3.0 and we didn't have splat books full of the names you predict. Take a look at the 3.0 feats. There were simple maneuvers in the PHB such as grapple...

I actually think they didn't go far enough in simplifying the names. Tortuous strike or Deft Strike still sound clumsy artificial compared to Lunge or Gouge.

I think you make some good points Ice Fractal. However, I believe we haven't seen enough to guess how much damage a rogue is doing per attack. In 3.5, most of a melee type's damage came from feats. If this is the case in 4e, rogues could actually have better per attack damage output than in 3.5.

I think minor action potions are a bad idea unless players get powerful abilities that cost minor actions. If they don't, then there is no reason to not chug a potion every round. That's almost the definition of broken. Increasing the healing power of potions is a much better idea.

I think its funny you say this because it seems unambiguously true in any given fantasy world you may consider.

Think about it this way. Having all your gear constitutes 99% of the game. If you balance encounters for PCs without gear, you are have appropriate difficulty for that 1% and make the other 99% too easy. You can still play games with regular gear, but the DM has to adjust the encounters...

It's not biased to title your thread with the opinion of your post. Would say "Game rules are not the physics of the game world" is biased? How about I want 4E NOW!?

Yes, almost all items are like this in wow.

Heh, well, actually I would say this rule is not arbitrary from a gamist perspective but is arbitrary from a RP perspective (is that the opposite of gamist?) Arbitrary means unsupported. But there is a good gamist reason for this change: we don't want low level characters with high level items...

Is a rule saying "2nd level fighters can't weild +5 vorpal longswords" the only way to prevent it from happening? It's not! That's the whole point! A non-arbitrary rule can accomplish the same result. We can keep items level appropriate without slapping "requires level 11 or higher to wear" on...

I suspect level based requirements for items is the most arbitrary rule possible. I cannot fathom how anyone could defend it. Why not just make all rings expensive? Or have their effects scale up with level? They're are plenty of solutions that have the same end result and aren't arbitrary...

The tiefling on the cover of the PHB is basically the classic Satan. Now despite being a demon prince in the game, Orcus doesn't look all that demonic. Sure is red and has horns but he's also got a tail, wings, bulging muscles, and a rhino's face. To someone who doesn't know anything about D&D...

I think its also matter of increasing expectations and understanding. This annoying bookkeeping was rife in 3E but wasn't recognized as a problem. Nowadays we know it is bad and despise it when we see it.