Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Assumptions about character creation
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="Lanefan" data-source="post: 8120678" data-attributes="member: 29398"><p>It sounds like your DM (or you, if you were the DM) was running 4e on hard mode.</p><p></p><p>I see them as more similar: the fighter making an attack and the rogue keeping watch are both trying to "do a thing"; with the main difference being that the fighter has a known target and obvious success-fail condition where the rogue does not.</p><p></p><p>By that I mean while the attacking fighter only has two possible outcomes...</p><p></p><p>Hit the opponent for damage</p><p>Miss the opponent</p><p></p><p>...the watching rogue has three:</p><p></p><p>Succeed in noticing something</p><p>Fail to notice something because of bad luck (or incompetence)</p><p>Fail to notice something because there's nothing there to notice. (should be indistinguishable at both player and character level from failure due to bad luck)</p><p></p><p>You're assuming all the anecdotes in that 47 are my own. I could gather 47 anecdotes from 47 different people on some game-related topic on these forums with virtually no effort at all. Only one of those would be my own.</p><p></p><p>Not sure quite how this is supposed to read, but it comes across as saying that fun (or potential fun) shouldn't be a reason for including or excluding any given element in the game - which seems a bit odd somehow, given as in theory fun is the root goal of the whole procedure. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>You're talking about the expected results of rolling six times, I'm talking true average: taking the actual average of 4d6k3 (which is 12.24 or something close) and breaking that out into the closest set of six whole-integer numbers.</p><p></p><p>And now I forget why we were talking about either one. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>I think you might have misinterpreted me somehow, which isn't that difficult all in all. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> We're also talking about two different definitions of 'lucky' here, which probably isn't helping.</p><p></p><p><strong>Born lucky:</strong></p><p>Theory: where lucky is defined as having significantly higher starting stats we can expect the lucky to survive more often and-or longer.</p><p>Practice: my own numbers tell me starting stats make a very small* to negligible difference to one's chances of survival at any point.</p><p>* - not sure if this difference is 'statistically significant' or not; the eye test says it's relatively trivial.</p><p></p><p><strong>Lucky in play:</strong></p><p>Theory: where lucky is defined as avoiding the mines where others do not we can expect the lucky to survive more often and-or longer.</p><p>Practice: agrees with the theory.</p><p></p><p>So yes, only the lucky survive; but here we mean 'lucky in play'. Being 'born lucky' matters little if at all.</p><p></p><p>What I've been trying to point out is that this is exactly what my numbers don't tell me. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>Rare indeed is an adventure where one player goes through seven characters! Rare enough that I've seen it happen exactly once in 38 years of both DMing and playing - but that once will never be forgotten in these parts: the most gonzo attempt at Keep on the Borderlands you'll ever (not) want to see! All four players went through at least five characters each; one managed eight of which two survived.</p><p></p><p>This was the first adventure in my current campaign; and five characters from it are still out there eleven+ years later either on hold (waiting to be played again) or retired (player has since left the game).</p><p></p><p>Would 4e even be able to handle a truly long campaign without some serious slowdown in character advancement?</p><p></p><p>Because the rules-as-written are crap?</p><p></p><p>Anytime unlimited re-rolling is allowed, or a mechanic like take-20 rears its head, there's a problem. But if one roll represents your best attempt period, lots of these headaches go away.</p><p></p><p>Recognizing errors is easier in hindsight than on the fly, to be sure.</p><p></p><p>For me, whacking save-or-die out of 1e would take about the same amount of work as introducing it to 5e.</p><p></p><p>And I am one such, and will ever be.</p><p></p><p>So the problem lies simply in their labelling of the first few levels as 'heroic', and you'll hear no disagreement from me on that. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>'Heroic' shouldn't start until at least 5th level. But the marketing department has other ideas...and so low-level play gets rather badly mis-labelled.</p><p></p><p>There's also not enough warning given in the PH to advise players that bad things will inevitably happen to their characters.</p><p></p><p>Where I play rogue-likes to - pun intended - death. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 8120678, member: 29398"] It sounds like your DM (or you, if you were the DM) was running 4e on hard mode. I see them as more similar: the fighter making an attack and the rogue keeping watch are both trying to "do a thing"; with the main difference being that the fighter has a known target and obvious success-fail condition where the rogue does not. By that I mean while the attacking fighter only has two possible outcomes... Hit the opponent for damage Miss the opponent ...the watching rogue has three: Succeed in noticing something Fail to notice something because of bad luck (or incompetence) Fail to notice something because there's nothing there to notice. (should be indistinguishable at both player and character level from failure due to bad luck) You're assuming all the anecdotes in that 47 are my own. I could gather 47 anecdotes from 47 different people on some game-related topic on these forums with virtually no effort at all. Only one of those would be my own. Not sure quite how this is supposed to read, but it comes across as saying that fun (or potential fun) shouldn't be a reason for including or excluding any given element in the game - which seems a bit odd somehow, given as in theory fun is the root goal of the whole procedure. :) You're talking about the expected results of rolling six times, I'm talking true average: taking the actual average of 4d6k3 (which is 12.24 or something close) and breaking that out into the closest set of six whole-integer numbers. And now I forget why we were talking about either one. :) I think you might have misinterpreted me somehow, which isn't that difficult all in all. :) We're also talking about two different definitions of 'lucky' here, which probably isn't helping. [B]Born lucky:[/B] Theory: where lucky is defined as having significantly higher starting stats we can expect the lucky to survive more often and-or longer. Practice: my own numbers tell me starting stats make a very small* to negligible difference to one's chances of survival at any point. * - not sure if this difference is 'statistically significant' or not; the eye test says it's relatively trivial. [B]Lucky in play:[/B] Theory: where lucky is defined as avoiding the mines where others do not we can expect the lucky to survive more often and-or longer. Practice: agrees with the theory. So yes, only the lucky survive; but here we mean 'lucky in play'. Being 'born lucky' matters little if at all. What I've been trying to point out is that this is exactly what my numbers don't tell me. :) Rare indeed is an adventure where one player goes through seven characters! Rare enough that I've seen it happen exactly once in 38 years of both DMing and playing - but that once will never be forgotten in these parts: the most gonzo attempt at Keep on the Borderlands you'll ever (not) want to see! All four players went through at least five characters each; one managed eight of which two survived. This was the first adventure in my current campaign; and five characters from it are still out there eleven+ years later either on hold (waiting to be played again) or retired (player has since left the game). Would 4e even be able to handle a truly long campaign without some serious slowdown in character advancement? Because the rules-as-written are crap? Anytime unlimited re-rolling is allowed, or a mechanic like take-20 rears its head, there's a problem. But if one roll represents your best attempt period, lots of these headaches go away. Recognizing errors is easier in hindsight than on the fly, to be sure. For me, whacking save-or-die out of 1e would take about the same amount of work as introducing it to 5e. And I am one such, and will ever be. So the problem lies simply in their labelling of the first few levels as 'heroic', and you'll hear no disagreement from me on that. :) 'Heroic' shouldn't start until at least 5th level. But the marketing department has other ideas...and so low-level play gets rather badly mis-labelled. There's also not enough warning given in the PH to advise players that bad things will inevitably happen to their characters. Where I play rogue-likes to - pun intended - death. :) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Assumptions about character creation
Top