Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 6052136" data-attributes="member: 87792">OK.  Something that costs a trivial amount of cash is a limited resource and something with a hard cap is an unlimited resource.  Wait, what?  4e hit points are limited by healing surges.OK.  Two fallacies there.1: If you run out of surges and take a healing surge's worth of damage you lose that many hit points.  Healing surge loss along can kill you.2: Hit points are not life threatening injury.  A character with 1 hit point is just as comptent at doing things as one with a hundred.Healing surges on the other hand do not recover until an extended rest.  Your argument here is that you can't hammer very well with a screwdriver when there is a perfectly good hammer in the box.  Healing surges do exactly what you want them to.Let me unpack this.  Fighters were literally no better at bending bars or lifting gates than anyone else of the same strength (and athletic score in 3e) and only had a better strength than equivalent if they had a natural 18.  Fighters could bend bars and lift gates just like everyone else.  And they did it the same way as everyone else with about the same chance of success as everyone else. So "having a high strength score" is your demonstration of what fighters did.  Wizards could do anything.  This was another problem.  Of course if we want to talk differented and 4e, Wizards get <a href="http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/prestidigitation.htm" target="_blank">Prestadigtatation</a> At Will.  That makes them more wizardly than the commoner with a few "I can do cool stuff buttons" to use.  Cantrips are more reenforcement of the archetype than we saw before 3.X - and 4e and Pathfinder making cantrips as at will abilities means that wizards are a lot more wizardly than ever before.This I'll grant - they had a combat spell that people would recover from too fast to be much use outside combat.  Clerics can now cast rituals whereas Warpriests come with their own utility powers.And this was silly.  No one could hide in shadows except a rogue?  Your differentiation here is that everyone except the rogue is inept?  Are they painted in neon paint?Except the fighter.  Who got?  The same ability to lift bars and bend gates that his strength would give anyone else?  And the rogue?  Who got?  The ability to hide in shadows while the wizard simply turned invisible.  The ability to climb walls (which anyone could do) while the wizard cast spider climb or fly.   The ability to pick locks while the wizard could cast Knock.And if we're going for 1e, the cleric was almost as good at fighting as the fighter, could wear the same armour and could cast spells.  And even, just to add insult to injury, brought more hit points to the party due to being able to get Cure Light Wounds.  As of Unearthed Arcana the fighter did get Weapon Specialisation.  Still couldn't do much out of combat that anyone else couldn't, mind.You are talking about 3.0 or 3.5 here?  Where the above is precisely true.  In 4e it's false.In 4e we have Utility Powers.  In the PHB, the rogue level 2 options include Fleeting Ghost, allowing a rogue to be better at stealth than anyone, Quick Fingers, allowing the rogue to be faster at thievery than anyone, and Master of Deceit, allowing them to be better at Bluff than almost anyone.  At level 6 the rogue can take Chameleon allowing them to stay hidden when someone is looking straight at them, and Nimble Climb making them the best climber (or could no one in your day other than the rogue climb walls?)We have exactly what you are talking about.  The rogue who uses his utility powers to specialise really is the best there is at what he does.  If you want an edition to attack on those grounds, try 3.0 or 3.5.  Because you are factually wrong about 4e here.Now you can claim that not all rogues have both Chameleon and Nimble Climb.  Or even many rogues don't have either.  That's right.  You get to pick what you are good at.  I fail to see how choosing your own niche to be outstanding rather than merely good at is a problem.You mean any creature with tremorsense or darkvision?  I guess 4e must have neither of these vision types.  Or perhaps it does.  Perhaps the rules for Darkvision say "Darkvision lets creatures see normally regardless of light" and for Tremorsense says "Creatures that have blindsight or tremorsense ignore obscured squares or invisibility within range.  They can see creatures in range regardless of these conditions."  (DMG p 67).  And as you need something obscuring the monster's line of sight in order to hide (unless you're a rogue with the camoflague utility power) hiding in shadows is a bad idea against these creatures.Guess what?  It still does.Stop spreading misinformation please.  This is wrong and it is against the advice in both the DMG 1 and the DMG 2.  Even the awful skill challenge rules in the DMG 1 explicitly restrict what skills can be used and explicitely tell the DM to "prompt a player into giving more information in how they are using that skill" and if the skill doesn't match the fiction you can't use it.  You are saying one thing, the DMG is saying the literal opposite.There are reasons it doesn't work for everyone.  The combat being too big and too exciting is one.  But the list of reasons you give stand in direct opposition to the rules of the game and to the guidance in the PHBs, DMGs, and Rules Compendium.</blockquote>

Verification