Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Thasmodious" data-source="post: 4670346" data-attributes="member: 63272">You gave a very skewed list, exaggerating things in 3e and downplaying and excluding things in 4e.&nbsp; You left out cantrips, cleric and paladin healing, dismissed rituals as ineffective.&nbsp; And you seem to not understand that you are not comparing two directly related things in the two skill systems.&nbsp; In 3e skill use was a single roll to accomplish an immediate goal, most often.&nbsp; In 4e, skill use is often part of an encounter in which multiple skill use, teamwork, and strategy are necessary.&nbsp; In 3e, a skill check got you up a wall.&nbsp; In 4e, a skill challenge is an XP giving encounter with rewards and consequences for failure.&nbsp; The value of skills and their impact on the gameworld have been increased in this edition.Yes.&nbsp; Because as I've said, 4e blends freedom of character with mechanical support.&nbsp; This is a good thing.&nbsp; No instant win non combat spells.&nbsp; The players have to actually do things to &quot;win&quot; social encoutners, not just cast dominate.&nbsp; Characters have more balanced skill numbers against level based DCs so skill checks aren't mostly just auto-fail and auto-win.&nbsp; There are still plenty of ways to get creative with power use, many utilities useful outside of combat.&nbsp; You act like spells have to tell you how to be creative with them.&nbsp; You talk about web a lot, and some editions have a note on setting webs on fire.&nbsp; But no edition talks about using it as a safety net for a falling character.&nbsp; That is something the DM had to rule then and now.&nbsp; You aren't casting creatively if what you are doing is just part of the rules for the spell.First off, I didn't say &quot;just about&quot;.&nbsp; But combat-centric.&nbsp; Yes, it was.&nbsp; As was OD&amp;D, Red Box, 2e, 3e, 4e, 5e, 6e.&nbsp; That's what D&amp;D is.&nbsp; So is the PHB in every edition.&nbsp; The combat chapter of 3e and 4e is right at equal in length, and, as many people point out, 4e has fewer words per page.&nbsp; Most of the DMG is NOT dedicated to combat.&nbsp; Look at the table of contents again, you appear to have missed a few chapters.&nbsp; And every MM is about combat, in all editions.&nbsp; That's what we need monster stats for.&nbsp; We don't need stats to determine if goblins collect ceramic unicorns.&nbsp; We need to know stats, so adventurers can kill them.&nbsp; Anything else is story consideration and you don't need a stat for it.&nbsp; Go back, read what I wrote again, and this time, really read it, try to understand it.&nbsp; What I said, and have said from the beginning, is that 4e is a great blend of freedom of character and mechanical support.&nbsp; Yes, mechanical support for certain things is good.&nbsp; Having rules for conflict resolution, which is an accurate description of the whole of the 4e rule system, is a good thing.&nbsp; You don't need mechanics to determine if your character is happy or sad.&nbsp; You need them to determine if your high charisma noble convinced the king to aid the party.&nbsp; You don't need them to say that your character can play an instrument or weave a basket or paint a picture.&nbsp; You need mechanics to support using your skills and abilities to overcome challenges.&nbsp; 4e does that better, with a streamlined, more flexible system than any other edition of the game.&nbsp; So since all those things are still in 4e, 4e is not all about combat. Undone by your own twisted web of justifications.&nbsp; Now THAT'S some creative casting.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Thasmodious, post: 4670346, member: 63272"] You gave a very skewed list, exaggerating things in 3e and downplaying and excluding things in 4e. You left out cantrips, cleric and paladin healing, dismissed rituals as ineffective. And you seem to not understand that you are not comparing two directly related things in the two skill systems. In 3e skill use was a single roll to accomplish an immediate goal, most often. In 4e, skill use is often part of an encounter in which multiple skill use, teamwork, and strategy are necessary. In 3e, a skill check got you up a wall. In 4e, a skill challenge is an XP giving encounter with rewards and consequences for failure. The value of skills and their impact on the gameworld have been increased in this edition. Yes. Because as I've said, 4e blends freedom of character with mechanical support. This is a good thing. No instant win non combat spells. The players have to actually do things to "win" social encoutners, not just cast dominate. Characters have more balanced skill numbers against level based DCs so skill checks aren't mostly just auto-fail and auto-win. There are still plenty of ways to get creative with power use, many utilities useful outside of combat. You act like spells have to tell you how to be creative with them. You talk about web a lot, and some editions have a note on setting webs on fire. But no edition talks about using it as a safety net for a falling character. That is something the DM had to rule then and now. You aren't casting creatively if what you are doing is just part of the rules for the spell. First off, I didn't say "just about". But combat-centric. Yes, it was. As was OD&D, Red Box, 2e, 3e, 4e, 5e, 6e. That's what D&D is. So is the PHB in every edition. The combat chapter of 3e and 4e is right at equal in length, and, as many people point out, 4e has fewer words per page. Most of the DMG is NOT dedicated to combat. Look at the table of contents again, you appear to have missed a few chapters. And every MM is about combat, in all editions. That's what we need monster stats for. We don't need stats to determine if goblins collect ceramic unicorns. We need to know stats, so adventurers can kill them. Anything else is story consideration and you don't need a stat for it. Go back, read what I wrote again, and this time, really read it, try to understand it. What I said, and have said from the beginning, is that 4e is a great blend of freedom of character and mechanical support. Yes, mechanical support for certain things is good. Having rules for conflict resolution, which is an accurate description of the whole of the 4e rule system, is a good thing. You don't need mechanics to determine if your character is happy or sad. You need them to determine if your high charisma noble convinced the king to aid the party. You don't need them to say that your character can play an instrument or weave a basket or paint a picture. You need mechanics to support using your skills and abilities to overcome challenges. 4e does that better, with a streamlined, more flexible system than any other edition of the game. So since all those things are still in 4e, 4e is not all about combat. Undone by your own twisted [I]web[/I] of justifications. Now THAT'S some creative casting. [/QUOTE]

Verification