Search results

"Magic immunity" is defined in each golem entry as only providing immunity to any spell or spell-like ability that allows spell resistance. Those spells don't allow spell resistance, so they all work just fine. Even if you try to say the first entry supersedes the others, it obviously doesn't...

I can't help but feel this is an undeserved slight against 4E. As Firelance has already said, though it's quite the involved process to homebrew entire new classes for 4E, pretty much every other aspect of it takes very well to homebrewing. Adventure Tools made homebrewing monsters extremely...

Well, to be honest, I don't want to play a system where I have to second-guess the GM to that degree ;) Typically, I don't "buy" character options that only work in one particular situation, unless I can create the situation myself. And if the only choices (or even the majority of them) in a...

Saying they are "meaningless" was a bit of an oversimplification, I agree. However, where there are choices, optimization will exist--I can't help but feel that will be the case, always, for the kinds of games I want to play. There will always be choices that are better than other choices, and...

This hypothetical situation seems largely irrelevant to the discussion at hand. We're talking about the design of the system in general, not any specific gaming table. As I said, I understand if some things slip through the cracks. The system will never be perfect. If we can get something...

You know, someone who practices character optimization (a CharOper if you will) doesn't sit down and say "well, let's see how I can break the game today!" The aim is to have fun by creating and playing a powerful character. I don't see how this "wrecks the game" for the rest of you? Do you feel...

I, for one, feel like the system should be designed support that style of play. It's a style of play that many people enjoy, which is to say, looking through the books and rules to find a powerful combination of powers and abilities (or whatever you want to call them in the system) to make up a...

Oh, I don't disagree that hit points are an abstraction. Which is why I definitely think that things like falling damage are just fine as taking off hit points. It's usually just as reasonable to assume you get better at landing from falls when you level up as you get better at fighting, right...

What I describe is what the system models. It's called a "hit" in the rules when attack exceed defense. If that is a narrative choice, it's not mine, it's the system's. I don't think the game system particularly needs a subsystem that would contradict the very model it's based off of for these...

Traditionally, I would think that the Attack vs. Defense concept is determining whether or not the sword hits you. If the attack roll beats your Defense, you are hit with the sword, and HP represents how many hits you can take before you fall down. I have yet to encounter a DM that didn't...

The problem with that is that things like hit points and levels are abstraction. For that matter, why is getting stabbed with a sword suddenly less dangerous at 3rd level than it was at 1st level? The same argument works for just about everything else HP models. I mean, combat with goblins is...

My apologies, it's just I've heard the argument before in a serious context. Some of the things that I have taken for granted and seen taken for granted in many other places (that class balance between casters and non-casters in 3.x is atrocious) have been actually apparently seriously disputed...

If all those other spells weren't meant to be used, why do they exist? I think saying "well the wizard wasn't meant to be played that way" is rather dubious with the amount of core spells (and the assertion that such spells are non-core is frankly silly, they're right there in the PHB/srd)...

Hmmm, I don't know, but then, I don't know where you draw the line on "utility mage." For example, the illusionist and enchanter wizards (or mages) in 4th edition were extremely effective in combat, but again, that depends on exactly how the spells work more than anything. I would at least like...

I'll just add in here that one of the things that I love about 4E are the online tools for it--the character builder makes character building a snap, and using adventure tools I have made countless custom monsters. The custom monsters thing is a really big thing for me. I found the process used...

4E modeled these kinds of damage mostly as losing healing surges, which would in Next translate to losing HD (or taking that much damage if they had no HD). I don't know if that's the kind of modeling you are looking for, but it's at least a possibility that doesn't require too much extra...

To each their own. I greatly prefer to see HP totals going frantically up and down all over the battlefield as the fight progresses, and I hope that is something that Next maintains. In particular, low levels tend to be very swingy due to low HP, and if that's the case I hope healing stays...

They did something like this in 4th edition, the "Red Box," around the same time they started the "Essentials line." I don't know how popular it was. I do know a lot of the players online didn't much care for the essentials line (I thought it was fine), but in terms of sales, I have no idea how...

I'd appreciate it if you didn't pass judgment on the DM without knowing any details. You may love the system, but that doesn't mean it isn't considered irrecoverably broken for some. For example. I was playing a druid, and the DM had effectively nerfed wildshape to make it useless for offensive...

Just because your group didn't experience it, doesn't mean no one's ever did. The problems DO exist in the rules. They may not exist in your GAME, but the position that most of us hold is that they should not exist in the rules. And yes, I would imagine that many of us did run into these...