Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lyxen" data-source="post: 8424543" data-attributes="member: 7032025">NO THEY DON'T. Please read the rules, won't you:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">4e:  When your hit points drop to 0 or fewer, you fall unconscious and are dying.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">5e: If damage reduces you to 0 hit points and fails to kill you, you fall unconscious. This unconsciousness ends if you regain any hit points.</li> </ul>For christ's sake, can you please simply read the rules ? There is no "Dying" explicit in 5e, whereas, once more, it's there once per short paragraph in 4e, with even this: "When you are dying, you need to make a saving throw at the end of your turn each round. The result of your saving throw determines how close you are to death."Moreover, once more, there is absolutely nothing similar about the way interrupts and dying are managed.I certainly said nothing of the kind. Once more, Dying is dying, 4e tells you that expressly, without the smallest ambiguity whatsoever, where is the non-linearity here, pray tell ?The difference, indeed, is that 5e acknowledges, in general, that it takes more than a few words, however commanding, to make someone FULLY operational again when they are DYING.This is the precise part that I don't like about 4e. If you create martial classes that don't do magic, I'm all for it's it's awesome. Just don't sneak in powers that can only be magical behind everyone's back just because of balance. This is one mistake that 5e did not make, and it makes narration that much easier.5e is also explicit as to what can save you when you are at 0 hit points: "You are in the hands of fate now, aided only by spells and features that improve your chances of succeeding on a saving throw."No, as clearly demonstrated above.Again, no, there is no non-linearity here, WHERE IS IT ? No, the game tells you YOU ARE DYING and even created a condition called DYING. How ambiguous is that ? Is the word not clear enough ?Whereas 5e does not even use that word...Except that 5e, which uses natural language, does not use the DYING word, and did not create a condition called that way. Wheras in 4e, you are not only unconscious but very specifically DYING, in as many letters and told to you extremely explicitely.Honestly, are you pretending that all these uses of "DYING" whether as a condition or a description, in the rules, mean something else than dying ? Honestly...No, he does not. He was just unconscious, dreams of Arwen  and is awakened by his horse kissing him... Was he even dying ? Did he have any wounds ? You have zero proof of this.Maybe, maybe not, it might just have been recovery from unconsciousness. And even if it's the case, no one shouted to him to get up, which is the part that bugs me, not the part where someone, actually recovers naturally.Again, just unconscious / stunned / prone. Why would he have been dying, wearing an invincible mithral shirt ?And again, you have failed to show me the inspiration of others in here.And then, same situation, the character approaches from the side, he is pushed back, the rules tell you to move away from the wight, so clearly he has moved. Not only that, but depending on the situation, as I've pointed out, the character might have some movement left.Isn't the back of the dragon part of the dragon's space ? Then all of the above does not matter, it's impossible according to the rules. "A creature is considered to occupy the square or squares within its space." I hope that the back of the dragon is in his space, otherwise I don't see much being in his space...Of course, because that is the one thing that 4e never took into account, that space is 3 dimensional... So tell me, how high is the space of the dragon ? How many squares  ? Because that matters a bit for all the 4e powers, their range and their area of effect....And this is where 4e failed miserably for us, because in 4e you don't fly, you hop, at best. and can't do anything vertically.And I agree it's important, and I agree that you had to invent rules, but it just make the system break down if you look at it closely to realise that you don't even know how much vertical space is required by a medium creature, even less a bigger one. Is it one square ? Is it two ? We failed miserably at high level combat in 4e and at narration with that "flying" that the game let us do, and could not be bothered to create rules for this, it would have been way too complicated.I had that and much more in other editions, where my flying was not reduced to hopping around the battlefield, thank you very much. Of course, I could have extrapolated, but this is the perfect example of a constrained system requiring much more work than an unconstrained one to provide good narration. I have it out of the box in 5e with TotM, I need to invent (and write down, remember, this is a rule of 4e that house rules must be written down) pages and pages of rules for verticality in 4e.No, it does not work that way because, fortunately, we have the words of the designers themselves explaining what they intended.</blockquote>

Verification