D&D 4E 4e -- Is The World Made Of Cheese?

[ProfessorCirno]

Why do you get to decide what is and isn't odd in the context of the fantasy genre?

Maybe you could let folks decide what they think is odd or not for themselves ?


MrG

Because he always praises 4e, of course. Haven't you caught onto how EN World works by now?

Praising 4e = you're right.

Finding anything wrong with it - ANYTHING AT ALL! - even if you overall support it = you're wrong. And closeminded. And dumb. And a bad DM.

I could go on.

Also, it amuses me that "IT'S FANTASY IT'S A GAME IT'S NOT A SIMULATION" breaks down when someone wants to break down a door. Suddenly "YOU CAN'T DO THAT IN REAL LIFE YOUR WEAPON WOULD BREAK." Come on, at last TRY to be consistent.

 

[hong]

I see you've acquired the new 4th edition feat, Taking Things Out of Context.

This is where the o rly owl goes, yes?

 

[silentounce]

Have you not seen hong's postcount?

Also, what eleran said.

Maybe that's because he makes consecutive posts all the time, like this one.

EDIT: Ninja'd by the man, himself.

 

[Fifth Element]

I see you've acquired the new 4th edition feat, Taking Things Out of Context.

No, in 4E that would be a power. Feats are for little bonuses.

 

[Thasmodious]

You know, I see this on here a lot. Not picking on you in particular. But pointing out extremes and laughing doesn't solve anything. Of course we know that flesh vs. adamantium is going to result in bloody, pulpy fists. We also know that a person reduced to negative HP is going to fall prone. But what about an axe against a wooden tree for example? What about a mithril hammer against masonry? An acid arrow against a marble pillar? That's what he's asking for and it's completely reasonable. Just because you throw out unreasonable examples doesn't make all the other situations unreasonable as well.

Yeah, DMs could come up with hardness and resistance on the fly if they wanted to. In previous editions they didn't have to, it was in the book. And when something's in the book it tends to cut down on PC complaints as well. And at least you can assume it was playtested and some thought went into it instead of just coming up with something arbitrarily. Hell, asking for rules on how to adjudicate something doesn't make someone a bad DM. Judging from most of the OPs comments on enworld I'd say he's a pretty good one. I guess from some of your comments on here that a "real DM" doesn't need rules at all. If that were the case none of us would be posting in a forum called "D&D 4th Edition Rules," now would we?

I'm not the one pointing out the extreme and trying to use it to make some silly point, that would be lizard. The OP was about knocking down adamantium walls with your fist. And I don't advocate "no rules". In fact, in this thread, and others, I've pointed out numerous times that the DMG has a nice section, with a pretty table and everything, dealing with adjudicating just about any situation in which the players have to react with the game world in a manner in which their success matters and isn't guaranteed. It just takes a bit of common sense to apply it and realize that you can't tunnel through a wall with your fist.

As soon as you have a table specifically for non-combat tunnel digging with melee weapons, someone else will wonder why there is no table for handling "bathroom breaks" for characters. Or spicy food. Or alcohol tolerance. Or any number of other things that come up once or twice in a decade of gaming.

Instead of trying to cover everything, the DMG has a fairly simple set of rules, a table or two, and some guidelines to empower DMs to quickly and easily handle these rare situations without taking up a bunch of game time or needing to have a 100 extra sections in the DMG to deal with "% chance of salmonella in trail rations".

 

[silentounce]

I'm not the one pointing out the extreme and trying to use it to make some silly point, that would be lizard. The OP was about knocking down adamantium walls with your fist. And I don't advocate "no rules". In fact, in this thread, and others, I've pointed out numerous times that the DMG has a nice section, with a pretty table and everything, dealing with adjudicating just about any situation in which the players have to react with the game world in a manner in which their success matters and isn't guaranteed. It just takes a bit of common sense to apply it and realize that you can't tunnel through a wall with your fist.

As soon as you have a table specifically for non-combat tunnel digging with melee weapons, someone else will wonder why there is no table for handling "bathroom breaks" for characters. Or spicy food. Or alcohol tolerance. Or any number of other things that come up once or twice in a decade of gaming.

Instead of trying to cover everything, the DMG has a fairly simple set of rules, a table or two, and some guidelines to empower DMs to quickly and easily handle these rare situations without taking up a bunch of game time or needing to have a 100 extra sections in the DMG to deal with "% chance of salmonella in trail rations".

Where's the fun in that? I miss tables like this: http://www.geocities.com/floydreinstien/amshotgunbdg.html

That's worth paying for!!

 

[ForbidenMaster]

Because he always praises 4e, of course. Haven't you caught onto how EN World works by now?

Praising 4e = you're right.

Finding anything wrong with it - ANYTHING AT ALL! - even if you overall support it = you're wrong. And closeminded. And dumb. And a bad DM.

I could go on.

Also, it amuses me that "IT'S FANTASY IT'S A GAME IT'S NOT A SIMULATION" breaks down when someone wants to break down a door. Suddenly "YOU CAN'T DO THAT IN REAL LIFE YOUR WEAPON WOULD BREAK." Come on, at last TRY to be consistent.

No, its more like trying to find anything at all without actually reading the rules. This post is based off of accepting one section of rules and ignoring the other. In other words not taking the game RAW, but intentionally breaking the rules by ignoring them. How is that not wrong, closeminded, dumb, and being a bad DM?

 

[Thasmodious]

Where's the fun in that? I miss tables like this: http://www.geocities.com/floydreinstien/amshotgunbdg.html

That's worth paying for!!

Haha, no thanks, I did my time with Rolemaster back in the day. I was eventually released for good behavior and allowed to return to D&D.

 

[FoolishFrost]

Guys. Look like tempers are starting to get frayed. Might want to take a deep breath and count to ten.

Seriously, it comes down to this: The rules are the rules, and if you don't like them, change them, or play another game, or stare at them until they change. Either way you go, the last option is probably NOT going to happen, yanno?

But seriously. How about this:

Items can be damaged just like in the DMG. Items are objects that are not re-enforced into the landscape. A chain hanging from a wall is an object, the wall is not. A tree is not an object, but a single signpost is. Arbitrate as needed.

Everything that is a part of the environment is 'structure'. Walls. Big trees, things that provide COVER... That's structure.

Rules for structure are based on how long it takes to do the job with specific tools.

If you have picks, axes, and mauls, then a reinforced wooden door will probably go down in what? A minute? Two?

How long does it take miners to dig 10 feet?

How long does it take farmers to pull up a stump. With dynamite? Without?

We really just want to know how long it takes. Not anything like HP or hardness.

 

[eleran]

You're agreeing with me, you just haven't realized it yet.


MrG

This post just proves you have the same problem you accuse hong of...