Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thasmodious" data-source="post: 4673793" data-attributes="member: 63272">A small correction, at wills and basic attacks do scale by tier.  Reducing hit points is still abstract though.  Sure, you use a weapon, but its not always physical damage.  20 points from a longsword doesn't always represent a cut, or at least not 20 points of cut, some of that is morale, defensive damage, etc."Because if it didn't, it wouldn't be worth doing" is exactly the kind of philosophical difference I'm talking about.  I'd guess we are in about reversed positions.  I played and Dmed 3e since it came out, loved it, had a blast, but never fell into agreement with the system about how it approached D&D.  4e does for me.  Designing the rules based on the idea that they are pretty useless if the PCs aren't interacting with them (if a tree falls in the middle of a forest and the PCs aren't there, does it need to have a stat?) is something that makes sense to me.  I scaled DCs on the fly in 3e all the time to keep rolls relevant.  That's the trick, though.  That's the philosophical disconnect I'm talking about.  It is inconsistent if looked at a certain way.  It's not inconsistent when looked at by someone who shares the philosophy of the edition, it's actually rather cohesive.  There are exceptions of course, individual examples, but there always are.Don't get too caught up in the terminology.  Prone is the generally correct term for what you are doing mechanically in that situation because most things have legs.  An ooze, obviously does not, but the mechanical effects, and the general condition are not hard to explain.  Knocking an ooze prone would consist of interrupting its form to a significant degree such that it must spend a move action to reform (think about Terminator 2, when Arnie nails Robert Patrick with an explosive round and he just stands there for a few seconds, an exploded mess, until he can reform and continue moving), its get a minus to attacks because your hammerblow just splatted it six ways to Sunday and it has trouble forming pods of goo to smash your allies with, just for a few seconds though.  Meh, first I think the GNS model is complete crap, but if you want to stick to those terms, I don't think I've seen anyone describe 4e as simulationist.  It doesn't go for that at all.  And the implication that fans of the edition swing intepretations in whatever way fits is a bit insulting.  It's just a difference in how the game is approached.  Does a lock need a DC if the PCs aren't trying to pick it?  Does an NPC crafter need a craft stat, and if so why?  3e and 4e answer those questions very differently.  You're either a fan of one approach or the other.  It's not logic circuits, you have a philosophy you buy into, 4e violates that in some ways, you have a problem with that.  It's not like 3e has flawless internal logic and 4e doesn't.  You just have things you accept as "right" and things you don't.  And there is no need to attempt to push buttons with nonsense like 'tacitcal minis game' or by implying fans of 4e are the functional equivalent of Billy Mays with OxyClean.  Can't we all just get along?  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f631.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":o" title="Eek!    :o"  data-smilie="9"data-shortname=":o" /></blockquote>

Verification