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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Balesir" data-source="post: 5878798" data-attributes="member: 27160">I don't think HS were ever stated in the rules as being "physical damage", no - and I think that was quite intentional. This is an aspect of 4e that I see as revolutionary and quite an epiphany in the design of D&D-type RPGs. It defines the role of the rules as being to determine (only) those aspects of the imagined fiction that must be synchronised among all the players; the rest it leaves to the individual imaginations of those playing to visualise as it suits them.I think this is briliant, because everyone at the table will, inevitably, have their own visualisation of the imagined events, and these versions will inevitably differ in detail. The designers of 4e simply realised that the function of the rules is to determine how those elements that must be synchronised if play is to remain meaningful will be defined. The written rules furthermore communicate those definitional mechanics to the players, so that they know enough to frame their own visualisation such that it will not conflict with the rules (and thus the synchronised elements of the fiction).It works on such a clear picture of what is going on at the table that it just makes sense. It falls down when (a) the players (most likely the DM) decides that they want to define different synchronised outcomes from those set out in the rules, and (b) they don't communicate the changes to the rules that they are (unilaterally) making, leading to other players seeing a clash between how they are envisioning the scene and the declared synchronised elements.</blockquote>

Verification