D&D 4E 4e Constitution - what a waste of time !

[Caliban]

I don't appreciate your tone. I stated how I run my game in what, to all appearances, is a civil conversation. If are offended by the idea of a dynamic dungeon, I apologise for presenting the idea.

Hey, that's cool, I didn't much like your tone either.

Since you made a point of saying how much you liked hyperbole, I thought I'd do you the favor if using some in return.

Guess you only like it when you are the one using hyperbole to tell people they are playing the game wrong. I'll try to keep that in mind.

 

[twilsemail]

Edit: This post had no relevance to the topic at hand and has been removed by the poster.

 

[Caliban]

While I understand your want and need to read into my posts as you will, can you please stop misrepresenting them in these forums?

Much like you just did with my post in that very sentence? Bravo!

I've nowhere said anyone was wrong or a poor DM. Again, I stated my opnion on how I enjoy running a game.

Oh, you did a bit more than that.

Please, consider the following.
1. Stop putting words in my mouth.
2. If you're going to cite my hyperbole as the inciting factor in your rage, at least quote it. You've quoted a metaphor.

I quoted exactly what I meant to quote. Methinks you take it to seriously.

Edit: Misquoting and misrepresenting previous text is also not hyperbole. Really it's nothing at all, aside from rude and unnecessary.

Since I did neither, I'm now confused. I quoted exactly what you said, so how is that misquoting? oh, wait you're exagerrating things again. There's that hyperbole you love so much. Bravo!

3. Take 5 minutes to consider that perhaps I am not in the same mood you're in.

Obviously!

I'm not on some high horse preaching that my way is right.

Oh, I think the bit I quoted indicates just a little bit of preaching. Maybe more than a bit.

I'm stating how I run my game.

In a way that denigrates somone who runs their game differently. Which is what I pointed out in the bit I originally quoted.

Everyone enjoys their own playstyle and will attest to that being the best. While I enjoy a dynamic dungeon more than a static one, I've never once said or implied that it's better.

Oh, that's so not true.

I apologise for whatever I've done to offend you, again. That was not my intent.

I'm really not offended. Just amused at the foibles of humankind.

I point out one questionable thing you said, and you act like I've gone on a full scale attack against you.

Edit: I've read plenty of threads where you were a contributor. I feel you've often got something meaningful to add to the conversation. I respectfully request you cease this agressive and frankly abusive line of conversation. If you wish for this conversation to continue, I'd ask we at least do it through PM as I don't feel it's any longer one meant for public eyes.

Then why did you post it here instead of PM'ing me? Please do continue, I find the hypocrisy delicious.

It warms the cockles of my shriveled black heart, making it pulse with fresh bile.

Or is that too much hyperbole again? I'm still trying to get the hang of this hyberbole thing.

 

[twilsemail]

I think what WotC did with Constitution is the same with other stats. They made it so that only a few stats are relevant to a specific class, and on top of that, it's only good for endurance.

Hmm, here I was trying to argue the point, but the more i try and find arguments, the more i find that the topic may be right. I wouldn't say it's a COMPLETE waste of time, because if you're not a str class, it could help wioth fort defense.

I think that you could argue that Constitution makes a good tertiary stat for every class while other stats, like Int, Strength or Charisma do not. Con isn't the miracle stat that it was in 3.5, but this isn't 3.5. HPs and Surges are certainly a useful resource that everyone makes use of.

 

[Legildur]

I think that you could argue that Constitution makes a good tertiary stat for every class while other stats, like Int, Strength or Charisma do not. Con isn't the miracle stat that it was in 3.5, but this isn't 3.5. HPs and Surges are certainly a useful resource that everyone makes use of.

I agree that it is a great secondary or tertiary stat - probably more so the latter - based on my limited experience. In 3.5E, my group thought Con was clearly a secondary stat.

 

[jorrit]

I really don't see how that matters much here. Those are two enemy types, the lowest of which are levels 4 and 5 respectively. By that point, you've had 3 opportunities to pick up Durability if your character is frequently running low on surges.

Additionally, looking at the Wights the level 4 and 5 version are a Controller and a Skirmisher. Since it's only their melee At-Will that drains a surge, it shouldn't come into play all that much. Ultimately though, these are two enemy types out of the entire MM. How many times are you really going to run into healing surge draining enemies? Your DM also knows what they're capable of, and should be planning his encounters accordingly. Its an obstacle, but it's hardly something that brings the entire healing system crashing down.

Well I was just mentioning them because we encountered one of those in the final level of KotS that we just finished. And it did manage to get remove all my remaining healing surges since Kalarel's level was the fourth in a row without extended rest. I had to be very careful after that but luckily it didn't turn out to be a huge problem.

Greetings,