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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="justanobody" data-source="post: 4551875" data-attributes="member: 70778">Since I have none of those "abilities" yet can continually do the same or more damage, not less after the initial hit.......too many splat books used, which is why you can do so many strange things with that edition.The point still being that you shouldn't need all that crap from the powers system or something else to do something with common sense.Yes common sense should play a part of games, otherwise why have rules at all.Too many ifs for my taste.At any point where there is a chance to do more damage once, and then less damage for the same thing there is a problem, when the chance of succeeding has gone up, not down and all other variables remain the same.I hit you in the head with a hammer 3 times and it does the same damage each time. The fourth time I hit you it does more damage, then the 5th time it somehow does less that the fourth.There is a problem with that progression, unless the fifth time there is nothing left to damage and all possible damage that could be done, has been done.So whether me hitting you, or you hitting me...pick one as PC and the other as monster it doesn't matter....the same thing will hold true throughout and if it doesn't then something has broken within the system and the rules....the game physics have broken.This is something I strongly am against. Players only get to decide what they want to do, and with that have more narrative control over anything the DM has, as the DM only sets up chances. The players don't get to choose they are hungry so they must eat to use power Y that grants 10 HP when eating.What if they are full and cannot eat? No amount of "narrative control" can solve this issue.The players decide when they can do something by trying to do it and succeeding. This is a major flaw I see in the design of the powers system, and one I do not care for.Players can try to do anything, but the DM and judge of the world should be the one deciding if conditions are right.Why not just remove the DM completely if all they are is a dice checker to verify rolls vs a table of outcomes or probable chances of success.Players can't have everything. This isn't Chutes and Ladders with small children to cry because they fell down a ladder.I also don't need some power to tell me what I want to try to do. I don't need it to flavor my game for me, because I am intelligent enough to state tot he DM I was to jump over the table and impale my opponent with my javelin.I don't need a named power to try, and see no reason a player of mine should need that limitation either. Because without that named power, then they are limited in what they can do, and how many times they can, otherwise until the javelin is lost/broken, and the run out of table, my players can jump over as many times as they want stabbing whoever they want.I give them that extra narrative control where the powers hold the players back, and deny it from them with its arbitrary limits.I don't recall quoting this, but maybe it has to go with the section above, so use that for a response to this quote, unless I figure out what and edit later what I was going to say here.I don't like giving silly limits to players for no reason. Only one person never got firebuilding NWP. They just couldn't give me a reason why their character could build a fire. It actually turned into a great game device since it was built into their character that they couldn't figure out how to build a fire in ANY circumstances.Once again like powers, some strange and silly limit on the number of things a player has a chance to do, that doesn't belong.</blockquote>

Verification