NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tomBitonti" data-source="post: 9224678" data-attributes="member: 13107">Comparing "cut of his head" with Come and Get It is not a good comparison.As a more defined example, let's compare Bull Rush, from 3.5E, and Come and Get It, from 4E:Note that in 4E "pull" is defined to be the same as "shift" and "push".  The fighter using CAGI is not presumed to be necessarily actually pulling the target.In the 3.5E description, actually pushing the target is unambiguously a part of the action.  Additional details are consistent with this -- larger targets are harder to push.  The movement must be away from the attacker.  The attacker can follow behind the target if they desire.In the 4E description no details are given (nor are needed) as to how the target gets moved.  Were they caused to stumble closer?  Were they made to be dis-oriented and caused to move to a location not of their choice, but of the attacker's?  Were they goaded into moving next to the attacker?  Were they literally dragged closer by the attacker hooking them and moving them closer?  Did the attacker mentally take control of their facilities and compel them to move?  (One could argue that some form of trickery or a taunt is permitted as an explanation, and a hook is not permitted, since the attack is against Will.)The 3.5E bull rush ability is much more strongly described than the 4E Come And Get It.  While there are details of exactly how the target was pushed with bull rush -- Did the attacker give them a shove with both hands?  Did the attacker give them a strong kick?  Did the attacker hunch behind their shield and forcefully plow into the defender?  -- None of these rises to the level of detail which must be provided to explain a use of Come and Get It, and none is categorically different than the others (all involve a physical push; none involve trickery or mind control or hooking the target).One could try to correct CAGI by adding a description:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Your dazzling display of prowess causes the target to be momentarily confused.  You pull the target up to 2 squares to an adjacent square.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Your deadly weave of attacks leaves the opponent no defensible option except to move closer.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You unleash a torrent of vile insults that the target cannot ignore.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You leave yourself apparently vulnerable, causing the opponent to rush forward, heedless of the strength of your position and the awaiting attack.</li> </ul>All of which sound fine, but all of which work better if CAGI had not baked in Strength vs Will.  In each case, I'd want a different attack combination, and would apply different defensive modifiers depending on the defender.(Which turns this into a different problem: CAGI simply having bad design, as most supplied descriptions of how it works might want a different check and different defensive modifiers.  Something to think about.)TomB</blockquote>

Verification