Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 6309883" data-attributes="member: 2525">None of that matches the response I gave you on Page 42, and which several people agreed with.I said there were so many player options on the character sheet, that in my experience players simply didn't think much outside the character sheet.&nbsp; They didn't feel compelled to think &quot;There is a chandelier I can swing on, and then attack my foe at the end of the swing&quot; because they had 12 powers in front of them (in the form of cards for my games), many of which moved foes and damaged them during that move, anyway.&nbsp; So Page 42 simply rarely came up in our games because of the quantity of options the players already had on their character sheets.And a lot of people agreed with me in that.And none of that is about 4e being bad (it's a game I loved overall), or Page 42 being over or under powered (it worked fine, when it actually came up, which was rarely). It's that Page 42, as an expressly DM tool to deal with times when players did something outside the stated rules, was NOT actively encouraging it's use, but passively doing so purely as a DM reaction.&nbsp; If it were actively doing so, it would have been in the PHB, and it would have printed out as a power or series of powers on those cards created by the DDI character sheet generator, and it's use would have been repeatedly encouraged and referenced in the player expansion books.&nbsp; I know of groups who did just that, adding a power card that amounted to &quot;Do something awesome&quot;, but those were house rules.&nbsp; There was nothing &quot;active&quot; about the way Page 42 was presented in the game, as it was not player-focused - it was purely a passive presentation described as a reactive thing for DMs.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mistwell, post: 6309883, member: 2525"] None of that matches the response I gave you on Page 42, and which several people agreed with. I said there were so many player options on the character sheet, that in my experience players simply didn't think much outside the character sheet. They didn't feel compelled to think "There is a chandelier I can swing on, and then attack my foe at the end of the swing" because they had 12 powers in front of them (in the form of cards for my games), many of which moved foes and damaged them during that move, anyway. So Page 42 simply rarely came up in our games because of the quantity of options the players already had on their character sheets. And a lot of people agreed with me in that. And none of that is about 4e being bad (it's a game I loved overall), or Page 42 being over or under powered (it worked fine, when it actually came up, which was rarely). It's that Page 42, as an expressly DM tool to deal with times when players did something outside the stated rules, was NOT actively encouraging it's use, but passively doing so purely as a DM reaction. If it were actively doing so, it would have been in the PHB, and it would have printed out as a power or series of powers on those cards created by the DDI character sheet generator, and it's use would have been repeatedly encouraged and referenced in the player expansion books. I know of groups who did just that, adding a power card that amounted to "Do something awesome", but those were house rules. There was nothing "active" about the way Page 42 was presented in the game, as it was not player-focused - it was purely a passive presentation described as a reactive thing for DMs. [/QUOTE]

Verification