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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 6801186" data-attributes="member: 957">I'm going to skip the massive change of subject.False.You said:  "You wouldn't send first level PCs to 200 foot cliff land any more than you'd send them to the Demonweb Pits or to the lairs of elder dragons."Read more: <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?473785-Failing-Forward/page56#ixzz3xPpwOZxf" target="_blank">http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?473785-Failing-Forward/page56#ixzz3xPpwOZxf</a>You equated sending them to the cliff with sending them to the Demonweb pits or lairs of elder dragons.There is zero room for ambiguity between this and the idea that you would send them there, just not to fight.And, as I already offered, I get that you don't MEAN what you said.  But you said what you said.  Just as other have said things and then insisted they never said it.It is a direct quote.  And I ALREADY said you probably didn't mean it.No, I quite get the difference between mechanics and guidance.But first, in the case of 4E the guidance is baked into the mechanics.  Yes, you can ignore that, but as you have so clearly stated, 4e provides a system for telling a DM what height the cliff "should" be.  There is a much tighter connection between mechanics and guidance (aka "the math works") in 4E.  I make no claim whatsoever that a good DM can't ignore that connection.  And second, when 4E proponents say things like "You wouldn't send first level PCs to 200 foot cliff land any more than you'd send them to the Demonweb Pits or to the lairs of elder dragons." it is only fair to respond in that context.It is long after the end of 4E of the misrepresentations of the complaints also gets tiresome.  Particularly when they still take the form of denying the exact word you used two posts earlier.</blockquote>

Verification