D&D 4E Ben Riggs' "What the Heck Happened with 4th Edition?" seminar at Gen Con 2023

[Zubatcarteira]

In 5e, a 50 kg Rogue can hold a rhinocerous in place against its will with one hand. Grapple and trip don't do well with physics.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Neither do I. But that's not really the question. The question is: what makes sense? Is the only thing that makes sense to you an omni-directional cube? You cannot imagine that it has a primary foot?

I accept your explanation, but not that the reason for it is that the rules say so.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Because physics tells us that you can't trip a featureless cube.

And also that they do not move at all..unless acted upon by outside forces.

It's mostly silent regarding whether featureless cubes can devour things, but I suspect it's not something typically accounted for.

I think this is one of those things where real-world logic is at war with itself. Because the cube is also a creature.

And real-world logic would say that a creature that moves, has sensation, and other metabolic processes would need mechanisms for those processes. And presumably mechanisms that would have to be distributed somehow within the creature. And real-world logic could also reasonably conclude that the creature's orientation would impact that distribution.

It's really easy to go "lol, its a cube all sides of it are the same" but at that point you're ignoring its existence as a creature.

 

[darjr]

Yes, and gelatinous cube doesn't DO anything to you if you shove your hand into it to grapple it, only if you shove your hand into it to pull something out of it (or allow it to wander into your square).

No where does anything you have to shove your hand into it to grapple or trip or shove it.

Cause I dint imagine anyone would have to.

The step too far for me is knocking over a uniform Gelatinous cube would have any effect. You’d have to imagine something new about cubes to do so and adjust the fiction accordingly.

the others you don’t.

 

[Micah Sweet]

In 5e, a 50 kg Rogue can hold a rhinocerous in place against its will with one hand. Grapple and trip don't do well with physics.

They really don't, and probably shouldn't allow for it. But players hate it when their options are taken away, no matter how ridiculous they are.

 

[overgeeked]

I accept your explanation, but not that the reason for it is that the rules say so.

Okay. Though it is one way to make sense of things. Instead of reading a thing then immediately rejecting it, read further and try to work out why it is the way it is. Before throwing up your hands and saying it doesn't make sense and is therefore bad, you take the time to try to work out why it is that way. The rules say it works, but there's no lore to explain it. Okay...so fill in the necessary lore to make the rules make sense. It's just as valid as extensive lore then applying the rules to that. It's likely less frustrating as well.

 

[Micah Sweet]

And also that they do not move at all..unless acted upon by outside forces.

It's mostly silent regarding whether featureless cubes can devour things, but I suspect it's not something typically accounted for.

I think this is one of those things where real-world logic is at war with itself. Because the cube is also a creature.

And real-world logic would say that a creature that moves, has sensation, and other metabolic processes and so would need mechanisms for those processes. And presumably mechanisms that would have to be distributed somehow within the creature. And real-world logic could also reasonably conclude that the creature's orientation would impact that distribution.

It's really easy to go "lol, its a cube all sides of it are the same" but at that point you're ignoring its existence as a creature.

Perhaps mechanisms are evenly distributed throughout its body. Given what oozes are, that's what I've always assumed.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Okay. Though it is one way to make sense of things. Instead of reading a thing then immediately rejecting it, read further and try to work out why it is the way it is. Before throwing up your hands and saying it doesn't make sense and is therefore bad, you take the time to try to work out why it is that way. The rules say it works, but there's no lore to explain it. Okay...so fill in the necessary lore to make the rules make sense. It's just as valid as extensive lore then applying the rules to that. It's likely less frustrating as well.

I find forcing the world to conform to 4e's rules very frustrating.

 

[darjr]

In isolation the cube tripping thing isn’t a big deal. And at first it must not have been for me, even though I do remember telling a player they couldn’t trip a cube and then later regretted it cause that was their stick.

But it’s a view into how 4e solves problems and is a thing of its design that occurs too often for me.

I would get a kind of fatigue dealing with it so often.

I’d rather spend effort and time on other things than justifying rules mechanics in fiction, at least as often as 4e seemed to me to demand it.

 

[overgeeked]

I find forcing the world to conform to 4e's rules very frustrating.

I find forcing the world to conform to any game's rules very frustrating. That's why I play FKR games. Change the rules to suit the world. Not the other way around.

But, going the other way around is just as valid an approach. That's all I'm saying. It's not your preference, or really mine, granted. But it is a possible approach.