Search results

A little silly? THIS IS SPARTA!

Yes, that's what I think they should be as well. But since you can't exchange a daily attack for an encounter attack, they seem to be in different silos too.

In the preamble for 4E we learned of the thing called "silo". Character abilities are divided into distinct silos that you can't switch between. As the game was published we found that Powers were divided into four silos (aka A/E/D/U). But I have been thinking lately... why divide Encounter...

Well, I said that I would call them more swingy. Maybe you won't. But it's incorrect that we only care about the sign of the difference of the rolls. We care about the sign of the difference of the results (roll + modifier). If the modifiers are different, this makes the standard deviation...

This is incorrect. The standard deviation of 1d20 is 5.916 and the standard deviation of 2d20 (or 1d20 - 1d20) is 8.165. Opposed rolls have a higher standard deviation, so I would call them more swingy. They also eat up more time at the table.

You're expecting an explicit rule saying that you can take equipment from unconscious characters? In what edition of D&D have we had that?

Could you point me to that rule in 4E? I must have missed it.

Getting back to the original subject, I can see why some people react to the fluff described in the play-test report. In no edition of D&D I can think of has mere hit point damage forced you to rest for several weeks (especially with a cleric in the party). Obviously there was some condition...

No, it doesn't matter. I was just pointing out that the range 3 to 18 was not a universal D&D truth.

I reacted to that very same thing. In 4E starting ability scores range from 8 to 20, and can eventually reach into the high twenties. I agree that six ability scores (die, Comeliness, die) form a common ground, but the range of those scores has varied a lot through the editions.

I honestly don't understand your reasoning here. What does it matter if 2 is small compared to 20, while 35 is relatively large? It makes no sense to say that the result of 1d20+35 is determined more by the modifier than fate. While I agree that a larger fraction of the sum stems from the...

I hear this a lot, but it's simply incorrect. Since it's a linear function, the magnitude of the total modifier and target number does not change the influence of character ability. That's a different thing. Now you're comparing two modifiers and saying that a difference of +2 is small compared...

No mail from WotC here. Signed up as soon as the news went public.

I'll bite! How about swedish?

I did something like that for swedish. Huge disappointment when 4E didn't go OGL.

I once held a contract from TSR for the translation of D&D into swedish. We did publish two boxed sets and five adventure before went broke from it. After 3E was released, I approached WotC about a translation, hoping that they would be willing to consider something more unorthodox than what...

The OP almost exactly describes the math in my 4e clone. But after testing and contemplating, I decided not to go with a flat progression. For two reasons: 1. Static challenges. 20 levels later you want to feel that jumping across that narrow stream is no longer a problem. Or hitting the...

Why on earth will they do that just because 5e has been announced? I see no logic in that.

I fell instantly in love with that explanation when I read it - it just makes perfect sense. I didn't even realize that it didn't make it into the actual rule books. What a shame. And I like to have Raise Dead in my game.

I also like ability increases and that exactly how I do it in my 4E clone. Works extremely well.