Search results

Imban : The first two aren't entirely obsoleted by the third, because you can only use the third during the monster's turn. The other two are options of AoO or OA, or whatever they're called now.

I was indeed talking to Reynard, under the presumption that a new poster would be viewed as talking to the OP.

Yes, because in 3e they let you have dominate at will just like a vampire! All you had to do was study hard! NPCs have always had powers that PCs could never get. No change except in who is handing out the powers the PCs will never have.

Even if we're to accept your argument, I don't see how it's a big deal. Given that statistically the GM is just as likely to be untrustworthy as the players, splitting up the power seems to be the ideal state, since it moves as much power as possible from the GM, who has the largest single...

Kraydak - PC presumption is that gear gives +1/4 level bonus to hit, defenses, and AC. Just give the monster gear or a flat bonus that equals this for their class level. Easy.

Krazy, the designers have explicitly said that's not the case, though I'm not willing to look up the quote this late.

I fail to see what a 3e monster having more abilities than a 4e monster has to do with conversion at all. Just convert all the abilities, or if you like, drop the ones you're not going to use.

Fiat is bad because it makes it impossible for the players to know their character's actual capabilities. If you character can easily make a 20 ft jump, they know it under a set DC system. In a fiat system, maybe it's easy this time and hard next time.

I've done just fine without your "critical baseline." Next!

Definitely agree about the boring tactical combat thing. As I see tactical combat as the reason to play D&D over its competitors, and that portion of the rules certainly seems to be improving by bringing the options full casters have down, for balance, and the options available to martial...

I didn't say I don't roleplay, in fact about 80% of my current game is roleplay. However, if I weren't interested in tactics, I wouldn't bother with D&D. I can teach someone to play Unknown Armies in 5 minutes, have a better ruleset for mental degradation, and not have to agonize of builds or...

Varies wildly 20% to 90% depending on campaign.

I'd lose interest if it came down to throwing out the mat. Tactical combat is the reason to play D&D, as far as I'm concerned.

I'm glad that the game is designed to give more narrative control to the players. It's fine by me, and I'm pretty much the perpetual GM of my group. I like it when the players add to the narrative. Some of my favorite moments have been the result of the players taking the initiative and...

Depends on the kind of game I'm running. My current campaign is maybe 25% combat by playtime. I've run campaigns where it's more like 90%. And regardless, I like more rules, because I feel that as a combat system, there should be very little I need to adjudicate. I don't want to spend time...

Xechnao - Presuming of course, that you suffer some sort of terrible brain aneurysm and forget NPC interaction, plot, dungeon building and other things which are vitally important to the game. D&D combat is a tactical wargame, and I want the players to understand what their odds of doing things...

If your players aren't willing to consider the ramifications of slaughtering helpless humanoids, that's a player issue, plain and simple. If you want to fix it talk to them. And I love how you come to the conclusion that in an RPG, if there's no alignment system, the default is to slaughter...

You do market research on people, not books, and I'll bet my biscuit that the changes to the race slate are the result of that. I of course have not data, but neither does the other side of the argument, so on we go. I myself don't care about halflings, or gnomes for that matter. And you can...

We only deny it because we're sick to death of these discussions. Continuing to have these discussions will not cause us to capitulate.

Bad players will be bad players. They weren't constrained by the alignment system, as you point out, so why bother. Do you really think that words in the book stop people who are being purposefully disruptive? Anyway, I'd like to say that I actually like RIFTS alignments because they were...