Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 5259375" data-attributes="member: 7006">The hard part of rules text leading up to the first book of a new edition is that the rules are getting created, worked, changed, and edited every single day for months on end prior to release.  So trying to maintain a semblance of cohesiveness with rules and terminology was probably not the easiest thing in the world.  We can look back at it now (having had two years of worldwide playtesting, errata, and new rules created based off these original ideas) and we can see the glaring holes that now exist in the first PH (like something as simple as a clearly-state definition within the Wand of Accuracy power whether the DEX mod added to the attack roll could occur after hearing whether the attack was a hit or miss for example.)At the end of the swirling mass of terms and rules created by WotC for the first PH is when you really needed the worldwide playing of the game to occur before the book actually went to press.  That way all our fresh eyes could have told them "Hey, this Divine Challenge power isn't as good as the fighter's one", or "Here's the math between Careful Strike and Twin Strike as you've written it, and there's absolutely no way Careful Strike can ever be better than Twin Strike unless you add the Ranger's modifier to damage".So we can't fault WotC completely for not having all their rules and terminology ducks completely in rows prior to the first publication of the new rules, and truth be told we should marvel at how many rules they had and how well they actually worked together, all things considering.  But we are now at the point where we have a working game that could have a few bumps combed out should it ever go to print again, and mkill's just giving us a few places where we could start moving the brush.</blockquote>

Verification