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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5375926" data-attributes="member: 82106">It doesn't matter what was "in development" at what time. The only reason all Opportunity Actions cannot NOW follow the same rule is that different bonuses got written in. That would NOT have been a big deal to account for during design. The fact is that they simply could have had all the same bonuses apply to all Opportunity Actions. The Opportunity Attack didn't have to be distinguished, it could simply have been considered to be "any BA taken during an Opportunity Action" and the rules would have been simpler, cleaner, and worked just as well. It was a bad and confusing way for the rules to be structured, period. Honestly I doubt the designers even intended this at the start, it simply got codified that way and nobody really considered the implications until later. YOU may not find it confusing and hard to understand. I might not find it hard to understand since I studied the rules carefully and have a good understand of rules. EVERY SINGLE ONE of the players I've had in my campaign had to have it explained to them. Several of them had to have it explained MANY times over and I am not sure they have ever really grasped the whole thing, they just look at the numbers on their sheets that came out of CB and occasionally complain that they think their number is wrong and have to have it explained again, lol. These are not idiots, they are simply players that aren't focused on 4e to that extent. 2 of them have been playing and DMing other editions of D&D for 20+ years, so they aren't exactly rules challenged. The rule is JUST EXTREMELY OBTUSE AND HIGHLY OBSCURE. I think I know when I see such a rule. What it seems like to you is UTTERLY IRRELEVANT to us and since my opinion is based on observation of playing 4e since it came out I think it has a pretty reasonable basis. It is a real PITA. It isn't the only such thing and not THAT big a deal, but it certainly should have been thought out better to start with.</blockquote>

Verification