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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nifft" data-source="post: 5197565" data-attributes="member: 6562">Having a battlemap for 3.x allowed you to answer a lot of questions:- "Am I flanking?"- "Who is in the area of this Fireball spell?"- "Can I use the bonus from my Point Blank Shot feat?"- "Do I have cover from this attack?"Using a battlemap in 4e is just about as useful as it was in 3e. I'm sure you can get by without one, but the mechanics used to really encourage using one, and they still do.I dunno what you're talking about with respect to falling in a hole: in my experience, the battlemap was always for tactical combat, nothing more. Actually I think you'll find that video games stole the whole idea of HP from D&D, starting with Gauntlet. But that's a topic for another thread.IMHO healing surges make no less sense than HP did originally, and that's all I'll ever claim about them. I'll make the same claim for SWSE's abstract condition track, too.I'm NOT claiming that HP make perfect sense -- I'm always of at least two minds about how to interpret HP damage -- but I can't deny that HP make for a good game, and the exact same arguments that have always been used to justify HP work for healing surges. Well, coming from a fully mature, well-explored system like 3e, it's true that 4e looked rather barren. But IMHO that's just because we had 10 years to explore and augment 3e.But I strongly disagree that it's impossible or even difficult to run a wide variety of games in 4e. My group generally runs 4e as a nasty, gritty S&S setting just by mostly ignoring Rituals.- - -Now, we can have a discussion about the ways in which it's harder to augment 4e than it was to augment 3e -- and vice-versa -- but I'm not going to accept that either is rigid, inflexible, or impossible to house-rule.Cheers, -- N</blockquote>

Verification