Anyone know why vulnerabilities are gone?

[KarinsDad]

In fact, I bet the PCs themselves find ways to slap vulnerable onto critters, at least once they reach Paragon tier.

I REALLY dislike this about 4E.

PC: "Ha ha, you are now vulnerable to cold and guess what? I have a cold bow."

This seems so gamey and anti-fantasy. Anytime they add a feature like this to the game, they should add a fairly easy to acquire defense too.

BBEG: "Think again bow boy. I drank my anti-vulnerabilities potion today."
PC: "Yikes!"

 

[keterys]

Heh, the anti-vulnerabilities potion seems a lot more gamey to me

But I'd rather not have either, I suspect.

 

[KarinsDad]

Heh, the anti-vulnerabilities potion seems a lot more gamey to me

But I'd rather not have either, I suspect.

Agreed.

The anti-vulnerabilities potion is gamey. It's why I wrote it that way.

Protecting against this feature is just as gamey as having the feature.

The ability to add vulnerabilities to a foe is fine, IMO, if it is a magical effect.

To have a feat that changes the PC to allow the PC to change the NPC is, again IMO, the gamey part. It's rules with no rationale (or a very stretched one). How exactly are you changing the physiology of the foe because you hit him with an arrow and without using magic (or minimally, without using an alchemical potion to poison the foe)???

 

[keterys]

You freeze a certain portion of the foe using a cold attack (cause that is required, and that is magical...), rendering that spot more brittle and vulnerable to further attacks on it. It only lasts for a short time, but anyone can take advantage of it.

It is justifiable thematically.

Doesn't make it a good way for the feats and powers and weapon to work, though.

Stuff like a martial daily where you smash a target so hard that it gains vulnerability 5 all (save ends)? Sure.

 

[Regicide]

I wonder why the theory is that all fire creatures are more hurt by cold, or vice versa...

Mmm, it's pretty easy to see where it comes from. If a hot creature's body temperature is higher, the same degree of cold will have a greater effect on it. And vice versa. Unless of course it has a greater range of temperatures that it can survive at. I'm going to take a wild guess that hell hounds don't have the blubber or thick fur coat to give them that greater range of temperature survivability. Must be magic.

 

[Runestar]

I have always wondered why they retained elemental resistances but not damage resistance (or the equivalent thereof in 4e). If anything, it should be less problematic in 4e, now that each player makes just 1 massive attack/round (so dr would apply less often), and I feel it would help resolve the problem of powers letting you attack multiple times (since dr would apply to each hit).

If you are worried about the golf bag of weapons resurfacing, then simply have universal dr/-.

 

[Flipguarder]

I like mechanics like trolls have where a type of energy stops a certain passive power, or prevents them from using an powerful active one.

What I don't like is having hordes of undead be ruined each by a single attack from the 2 paladins I DM.

I'm OK with creatures entirely composed of ice being vulnerable to fire. But I don't think all elemental-ly creatures (frost hawks and the like) should be vulnerable to their opposite. Also I think that Undead should eventually "outgrow" most of their vulnerability

 

[Flipguarder]

I have always wondered why they retained elemental resistances but not damage resistance (or the equivalent thereof in 4e). If anything, it should be less problematic in 4e, now that each player makes just 1 massive attack/round (so dr would apply less often), and I feel it would help resolve the problem of powers letting you attack multiple times (since dr would apply to each hit).

If you are worried about the golf bag of weapons resurfacing, then simply have universal dr/-.

resist all X= dr/X

 

[Spatula]

Now, I do like things like cold slowing magma creatures, sure... but more damaged? Dubious.

Agreed, and IIRC the designers talked about using that sort of "vulnerability" more than the boring "you do more damage" variety. But it doesn't seem to show up much in the statblocks.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Mmm, it's pretty easy to see where it comes from. If a hot creature's body temperature is higher, the same degree of cold will have a greater effect on it. And vice versa. Unless of course it has a greater range of temperatures that it can survive at. I'm going to take a wild guess that hell hounds don't have the blubber or thick fur coat to give them that greater range of temperature survivability. Must be magic.

Of course under this sort of logic a snowball would have more of an effect on a campfire than a candle...

Vulnerabilities should be rare, not just applied to anything with a resistance and the "apply an additional effect" version of vulnerabilities is far more desirable than "do more damage".