Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dragonblade" data-source="post: 4062809" data-attributes="member: 2804">LOL! That is the most ridiculous statement I have ever read on this forum. Sitting in your basement and rolling dice does not a hero make, no matter what edition of D&amp;D you play.I think the thread is getting a bit off track here. From my perspective, 3e had the same risks (or lack thereof) as 4e, but they are in the system differently.Sure, you had Save or Die in 3e, but to offset it you had easy availability of Raise Dead and Resurrection. So if the players took a risk and died, what happened? Their PC is out of the game until they can find a high level cleric, and then they are rezzed. So in the long run, is there any risk?Not really. Just the risk that they have to go play Nintendo for a couple hours while the rest of their friends keep playing without them. IMO, that's not risk. Thats just boring. And to add insult to injury, when you do get rezzed you might have to level down your character. Most players would rather just roll up a new character. So is there risk? No, just bad game mechanics that discourage players from doing anything other than probing every 5 ft of dungeon with their 10' pole.In 4e, since there is no save or die, there is also no need for easy resurrection any longer. So now, you have characters that seem tougher, but that doesn't mean there is no risk. Its the same risk in the long run, just now you have cut out the whole problem with players going off to play Nintendo because their character &quot;died&quot; while they wait to be rezzed. The risk is no longer front loaded into a single die roll. In other words, the 4e designers have cut out the BS and the bad mechanics.I consider that an improvement.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dragonblade, post: 4062809, member: 2804"] LOL! That is the most ridiculous statement I have ever read on this forum. Sitting in your basement and rolling dice does not a hero make, no matter what edition of D&D you play. I think the thread is getting a bit off track here. From my perspective, 3e had the same risks (or lack thereof) as 4e, but they are in the system differently. Sure, you had Save or Die in 3e, but to offset it you had easy availability of Raise Dead and Resurrection. So if the players took a risk and died, what happened? Their PC is out of the game until they can find a high level cleric, and then they are rezzed. So in the long run, is there any risk? Not really. Just the risk that they have to go play Nintendo for a couple hours while the rest of their friends keep playing without them. IMO, that's not risk. Thats just boring. And to add insult to injury, when you do get rezzed you might have to level down your character. Most players would rather just roll up a new character. So is there risk? No, just bad game mechanics that discourage players from doing anything other than probing every 5 ft of dungeon with their 10' pole. In 4e, since there is no save or die, there is also no need for easy resurrection any longer. So now, you have characters that seem tougher, but that doesn't mean there is no risk. Its the same risk in the long run, just now you have cut out the whole problem with players going off to play Nintendo because their character "died" while they wait to be rezzed. The risk is no longer front loaded into a single die roll. In other words, the 4e designers have cut out the BS and the bad mechanics. I consider that an improvement. [/QUOTE]

Verification