Search results

Say what now? I will have a more cogent reply to your post - and others, since my last post in the thread - later, but I saw this and had to comment on it.

As ExploderWizard mentioned up-thread, just because you - the GM - know there won't be encounters at night, does not mean the players know that. How is this a "needless" waste of time? Part of the advantage of the table over MMOs and such is the ability, as a player, to do whatever, to...

Break my immersion, and you have broken my reason for being at the table. Skill challenges are - IMO - nonsensical and pretty fatal to immersion. With that out there, I'm going to try not to dwell on that aspect of the example and address the stuff behind it. In the example, you have a skill...

Huh. This might warrant further investigation in the future.

I prefer this approach - slower, more descriptive, more actual RP interaction. Even in situations where the characters are in a hurry, where such details and such simply get in the way, I feel that this approach helps engender the right feel for the players: you're in a hurry, and it shows when...

IH was underdeveloped and had some holes, but was relatively well-done and had numerous excellent ideas, even if the execution was somewhat lacking. I remember having high hopes for 4e when I heard that Mearls was at the helm...

As has been mentioned, D&D gets to the point where your gear is more important than you are. It doesn't help that D&D items are pretty bland. Perhaps part of the problem is the fact that D&D counts on players having magic items with the relevant pluses, so characters wind up tossing old items...

Oh joy. Here comes the badwrongfun brigade. :hmm: I was going to quote you and reply to various parts of your posts... but you know what? I don't care. There is no point in having this discussion with you, Rechan, until you lose the high-and-mighty tone. D&D is more than capable of supporting...

As I mentioned, my non-combat character is in a d20 Traveler game, which is a different ball of wax. In standard d20 D&D, it depends on the DM. If they strictly adhere to CR/EL and wealth guidelines, then you're right, playing a non-combat character is asking for trouble. If they're more...

I would also note, KM, that you chose not to do an FFZ blue mage. This makes me very sad.

With the help of numerous others, I wrote the learner PrC for 3.5, which is a blue mage. And someone else wrote a 4e blue mage. Honestly, IMO, both are terrible at it. You can shoehorn it in with 3.5, but it requires a ridiculous amount of game mechanics to make work, and monster abilities...

Combat-centric mechanics. Vancian magic. Black-and-white alignment. Rampant magic items. Abstract hit points. Nonsensical economics. Fantasy gun control. Lack of useful, sensible crafting rules. Character progression in neat little chunks. The d20. ...this list seems oddly familiar... :p

You play 4e, don't you? You do things on other peoples' turns because you are forced to by the system. If you did not, the whole group suffers. You have a choice, yes, but you will irritate the other players and would not be playing the game the way it was designed if you chose not to...

In some situations, it isn't really spectating, though. In combat, for instance, just because you can't contribute to the combat itself doesn't mean you're not there. You can almost always find something else to do. And even if someone else's character is doing something away from the group -...

I am irritated by it. With my non-combat character, I don't want to contribute in combat, unless the skills I have are useful in some way (which they rarely are). It breaks my sense of who my character is if the game forces me to participate in activities that my character is not suited for...

Yes, I understand 4e's paradigm. Doesn't mean I agree with it. And 4e has latched onto this particular solution so hard that you cannot see any other. I am right there with you on the idea that everyone takes their turns in order is a lame way to handle combat. However, perhaps rather than...

It is hyperbole. Combat is a minigame, too. 4e just focuses almost all of its attention on it (as does pretty much every other edition of D&D). In the game I'm playing in at the moment, I play a very non-combat character; d20 Traveler being what it is, because I'm not focused on combat, I...

A few reasons. For one, at this point, I can make the d20 system do whatever I need it to do. The d20 games I run would be pretty much unrecognizable to anyone familiar with the core. For two, one of my groups pretty much insists on only playing d20, and doesn't stray too far from core...

Combat-centric mechanics. Vancian magic. Black-and-white alignment. Rampant magic items. Abstract hit points. Nonsensical economics. Fantasy gun control. Lack of useful, sensible crafting rules. Character progression in neat little chunks. The d20.

Now that I am more awake, I think I have come up with a reasonable explanation as to why this sort of thing (the lack of costs and rules for "mundane" equipment and such) irritates some folks, myself included. Those of you who are against the codification of some things seem to be coming at...