Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8494962" data-attributes="member: 6790260">And see, this is the exact problem. This right here. This is the true, fundamental flaw that will never be overcome unless and until some group changes their opinions.Because what you've just said is: "Martial powers should, always, be subject to more limitations than magical ones, under all circumstances." In other words, martial powers are simply, on the whole, less useful and less powerful than magical ones. Period. As long as that statement is held true, it is impossible to find balance between the two. The assumptions produce a contradiction, because it is not possible to balance "thing that must be subject to extra limitations" with "thing that cannot be subject to any limitations," and never will be.I reject the notion that 4e was any different on the "open to GM overruling" front. Yes, the game is more transparent, so it's more obvious when it happens. But the books make it quite clear that you should do things because they make sense, not merely because you're following an algorithm. That's a common aspersion cast on 4e (that it replaced the GM's role, making them a mere rule-conformity checker rather than an active and driving force), but it just falls on its face when you look at any of the advice given in any of the DM-facing books and materials.As for the other: 4e has things like immunity to fear or fire or whatever. It's perfectly easy to have creatures that simply can't be hit by a power (e.g. I believe swarms cannot be pulled, pushed, or slid by melee or ranged attacks) or who can no-sale someone's signature move. Being out an encounter power because it doesn't make sense in context is perfectly valid in 4e.Why doesn't "you missed these 2" (or whatever) signify exactly that? You missed their Will defense (equivalently, they passed their Wisdom save)--whatever it was you did, it didn't work on them. That's the whole point of failing to pull off the maneuver....CaGI doesn't force the enemy to attack either! The only thing it does is movement (and letting the Fighter make an attack.)Actually, it DOES force actions, or at least a lack of them. Frightened creatures cannot (willingly) move closer to the source of their fear. By making the target frightened, you literally make them incapable of performing certain actions, no matter how much they might want to, e.g. they can't go past you to get to a target they'd rather hit because that involves approaching you.My apologies. I appear to have conflated it the adult amethyst dragon. I swear I checked it twice to be sure, but that evidently didn't work!I guess I just don't see how. If you miss (4e)/they pass their save (5e), whatever you attempted didn't work. That's literally the in-the-rules representation of "this creature wasn't affected by whatever you attempted."I mean, it can annoy you all day, it's still a thing that happens all the time at real tables. That it bugs you is not a reason for why we should presume that creatures always behave as creatures on Earth do. Isn't that an implication of old-school-style random monster tables? That you'll just be attacked, even if there's no real reason?</blockquote>

Verification