Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Crosswind" data-source="post: 4142709" data-attributes="member: 36615">That's sort of the counterpart to &quot;I have to be able to do it, there's a rule for it!&quot;, isn't it?&nbsp; The sentence you quoted leaves the power in the hands of the DM.&nbsp; The sentence I quoted leaves the power in the hands of the player.&nbsp; The reason I, personally, prefer the latter system is because, in my experience, good DMs are those who like to say &quot;Yes.&quot; to their players, and let them try things.&nbsp; And there are a -lot- of players who like to try to find odd rules and exploit them - 3E supports this.&nbsp; For a lot of DMs, it's tough to say &quot;No.&nbsp; The rule says you can have it, but in my game, you can't.&quot;.&nbsp; This leads to arguments, ill-will, etc.&nbsp; Making sure that all rules in the game are balanced, and letting DMs fiat the other ones helps solve this problem.But the difference between &quot;You can't do that, it's not in the rules!&quot; and &quot;I have to be able to do this, it's in the rules!&quot; ...well, those are the bad sides of 4E, and 3E, respectively.&nbsp; There's certainly room for people who prefer each.I tend to agree with you on what the flavor of D&amp;D is, but I've never really taken anything but mechanics from the PHB.&nbsp; So I wouldn't say that 4E is going to deprive my campaign of any flavor.&nbsp; Your objections are, however, perfectly reasonable.-Cross</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Crosswind, post: 4142709, member: 36615"] That's sort of the counterpart to "I have to be able to do it, there's a rule for it!", isn't it? The sentence you quoted leaves the power in the hands of the DM. The sentence I quoted leaves the power in the hands of the player. The reason I, personally, prefer the latter system is because, in my experience, good DMs are those who like to say "Yes." to their players, and let them try things. And there are a -lot- of players who like to try to find odd rules and exploit them - 3E supports this. For a lot of DMs, it's tough to say "No. The rule says you can have it, but in my game, you can't.". This leads to arguments, ill-will, etc. Making sure that all rules in the game are balanced, and letting DMs fiat the other ones helps solve this problem. But the difference between "You can't do that, it's not in the rules!" and "I have to be able to do this, it's in the rules!" ...well, those are the bad sides of 4E, and 3E, respectively. There's certainly room for people who prefer each. I tend to agree with you on what the flavor of D&D is, but I've never really taken anything but mechanics from the PHB. So I wouldn't say that 4E is going to deprive my campaign of any flavor. Your objections are, however, perfectly reasonable. -Cross [/QUOTE]

Verification