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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GnomeWorks" data-source="post: 4256322" data-attributes="member: 162">We heard this argument about fireball and phantom steed. That issue was fixed, was it not?Power Attack : Skill Training :: Fireball : Phantom Steed. I mean, seriously. Oh, wait, or is that needless symmetry? Ha, silly me and wanting a rules system that covers more than stabbing things and stealing their phat lewtz.Athletics isn't necessary. Insight isn't necessary. This is fun. We could probably go on for days this way.You could do away with those two skills and do exactly what you just mentioned. So why do they get to exist, and Craft doesn't?Or, is it?You play the game one way, I play it another. There's no reason both those particular methods cannot make use of the same system.You make a valid point, and perhaps the only vaguely valid point against my position. I responded to this idea earlier in this post.O RLY? Because I'm pretty sure that I just described D&D, except that I switched the mechanics combat resolution with skill resolution and vice-versa. Seems like a totally valid approach to me.You can't tell me that that is an invalid approach, nor that that is not D&D. Also, I'd really appreciate it if you didn't use the "that's not D&D" argument, because that'll lead us to a bad place of philosophical meanderings and discussions of just what, precisely, D&D is, and the nature of the game is such that pretty much everyone's definition is going to differ. I'm not trying to belittle you here, it's just that that discussion is going to be long, tedious, and probably not get us anywhere.Really? Because the utter lack of craft system in 4e kind of implies, to me, that that's not the case.Is combat the focus of each edition? I would argue that it's the primary mechanical focus, due to the history of the game, as well as the nature of combat. And again, there's nothing wrong with having a heavy mechanical focus on combat - but the system can support other things, and there really is no reason to not support those other perfectly valid approaches to the game.Your preferred system (4e, presumably) has holes. If I have to admit that 3.5 has holes (and I freely do, because it does), then you have to admit that your pet edition does, as well. There's nothing wrong with that, but it needs to be acknowledged.Why not have an actual Craft skill, or Brewing skill? Why have all those other skills at all? Why does Craft get cut, but not History?No.The thing that makes me irritated is that there are 300 pages telling me that I have to make my party's awesomesauce fighter fail his attack roll due to some minor bit of chance (the die hits the bag of cheetos, for instance).And I personally thought that they ruled combat to death, since it can be relegated to opposed skill checks. I mean, seriously, who wants to sit in combat for three hours? How droll. Just roll opposed checks and be done with it. We've got things to craft and drinks to brew! I don't need to know how many times you poke the orc with a pointy stick!Perhaps banging out that silverware is a life-and-death situation.</blockquote>

Verification