Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
A worry about "special case monster abilities"
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Lonely Tylenol" data-source="post: 4041532" data-attributes="member: 18549"><p>Why would they make it so that it doesn't cost anything? I've already said that I'm taking things like Book of Iron Might as my basis for comparison. In that system you give up one thing in order to get a chance at doing another. For example, you give up the ability to do damage to an opponent in order to attempt to cause a short-duration status effect. There has not been any suggestion on my part that this sort of thing should not come at cost. I don't see why you're reading it into my comments.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I never said that you couldn't create some kind of magic-y stunt system. Quite the opposite, in fact. The thing is, a stunt system is usually expected to replicate the sorts of things that Conan does, not the sorts of things that Gandalf does. That is the niche of a stunt system. Of course, you could just as easily make an arcane stunt system that anyone could use with the appropriate training. Call it Truenaming, or something...</p><p></p><p></p><p>Yet you don't make an argument about niche protection with regards to acrobatics? Shouldn't only rogues and rogue-like characters be allowed to do those things?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And stunt systems have been used as ways to alleviate that. However, there's nothing stopping a wizard with the appropriate skills (which should be easier to get in 4E, from the sounds of it) from doing some chandelier-swinging himself.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Niche protection doesn't need to be black and white. In fact, given what we're told about multiclassing, it's probably not going to be. I see nothing wrong with characters devoting resources (i.e. skills) to learning how to do a set of reasonably simple manoeuvres that mimic existing powers without actually threatening the utility of those powers. It's essentially the same as allowing people to find traps without Trapfinding in 3.x. Sure, it treads on the rogue's shtick, but how often is anyone going to devote the cross-class skill points required to get the Search and Disable Device skills they'll need, especially considering that there will be a hard ceiling on how good at it they can get without actually taking levels in a class that has those as class skills? They'll be half-decent, but won't be as good as if it were their primary job.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lonely Tylenol, post: 4041532, member: 18549"] Why would they make it so that it doesn't cost anything? I've already said that I'm taking things like Book of Iron Might as my basis for comparison. In that system you give up one thing in order to get a chance at doing another. For example, you give up the ability to do damage to an opponent in order to attempt to cause a short-duration status effect. There has not been any suggestion on my part that this sort of thing should not come at cost. I don't see why you're reading it into my comments. I never said that you couldn't create some kind of magic-y stunt system. Quite the opposite, in fact. The thing is, a stunt system is usually expected to replicate the sorts of things that Conan does, not the sorts of things that Gandalf does. That is the niche of a stunt system. Of course, you could just as easily make an arcane stunt system that anyone could use with the appropriate training. Call it Truenaming, or something... Yet you don't make an argument about niche protection with regards to acrobatics? Shouldn't only rogues and rogue-like characters be allowed to do those things? And stunt systems have been used as ways to alleviate that. However, there's nothing stopping a wizard with the appropriate skills (which should be easier to get in 4E, from the sounds of it) from doing some chandelier-swinging himself. Niche protection doesn't need to be black and white. In fact, given what we're told about multiclassing, it's probably not going to be. I see nothing wrong with characters devoting resources (i.e. skills) to learning how to do a set of reasonably simple manoeuvres that mimic existing powers without actually threatening the utility of those powers. It's essentially the same as allowing people to find traps without Trapfinding in 3.x. Sure, it treads on the rogue's shtick, but how often is anyone going to devote the cross-class skill points required to get the Search and Disable Device skills they'll need, especially considering that there will be a hard ceiling on how good at it they can get without actually taking levels in a class that has those as class skills? They'll be half-decent, but won't be as good as if it were their primary job. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
A worry about "special case monster abilities"
Top