Falling from Great Heights

[BryonD]

The conversation is a waste of time.

Agreed. As I said "vast gulf".

 

[Hussar]

No no no. I make no claim that I am in any way defining or limiting "roleplay".

But I stand completely by my description of THAT specific area as being outside the umbrella.

I can't be the only one to see the irony in this statement.

 

[triqui]

More attacks to defend against. Going up against a tank is bad, but I don't feel too good when twelve guys in a semicircle confront me with guns drawn. If I'm very skilled and well equipped, I have a better chance against the tank. In other fiction, I'll just kill all the guys with guns. They'll miss, I'll win.

But it's perfectly understandable why a dozen guys with crossbows drawn on you can be more dangerous than a single dragon. As always, play what you like

When you are Neo, you face 12 guys with guns without sweating, becouse you know you move to fast for them. They'll miss, you will win. You will flee from a single Agent, though.

You have a character that can face and kill an ancient demon. Ten bandits aren't a threat for him

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEgGt1VOasA&feature=related"]him[/ame]. And it is so, becouse you can Dodge Spears and Block Arrows.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZWNFVugMXA]dodge spears and block arrows[/ame] while cleaving lots of enemies because you kick ass

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3B0qXiaFp6Y]kick ass[/ame].

 

[BryonD]

I can't be the only one to see the irony in this statement.

shrug

Go back and look at what was actually said.

 

[JamesonCourage]

When you are Neo, you face 12 guys with guns without sweating, becouse you know you move to fast for them. They'll miss, you will win. You will flee from a single Agent, though.

You have a character that can face and kill an ancient demon. Ten bandits aren't a threat for him. And it is so, becouse you can Dodge Spears and Block Arrows. dodge spears and block arrows[/url] while cleaving lots of enemies because you kick ass.

Which is why I said "In other fiction, I'll just kill all the guys with guns. They'll miss, I'll win" in the quote you replied to. I also said:

The discussion one side is trying to have is "I'd like the game to be able to make low groups dangerous at all levels." Yes, it fits within the spirit of D&D: it happens at low and mid-low levels. However, characters grow out of that. We're agreed that it's the case. Now, one side is trying to say "I don't like that it happens, and would like to see an alternative."

The issue here is whether the game should be able to make mooks dangerous at high levels, or whether it should by default make mooks dangerous at high levels.

I don't care which way it goes, as long as both are presented as options.

I want the option. That's all. As always, play what you like

 

[Hussar]

shrug

Go back and look at what was actually said.

Well, going back and reading what was actually said, you claim that you believe your fictional characters have independent thought. Are you really sure you want to stand by that?

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Real-life survivals of such falls are extremely rare (like 1 in 1 million rare).

So, the problem isn't that the demi-god slaying paladin can survive the impact, it's that the demi-god slaying paladin can almost always survive the impact.

For many, it just doesn't make sense.




True.

But when a D&D player looking at the rules decides for their character that: "...yeah, no problem. I've got enough hit points to survive a jump off of this 200' cliff...". That doesn't make sense when thought about in a real world context (as many like to do).

Things that don't make sense, rarely feel awesome...instead they just seem confusing or counterintuitive.

There are people that want players to make decisions based on common sense and the reality of the situation, rather than based on an artificial construct of un-realistic rules.

One of the most awesome scenes I can remember from our 1e days was my level 11 insane ranger jumping off a 200' cliff into the middle of a vast array of demons because hey, he was pretty much insane and hated demons and had all sorts of vampiric regeneration! Sure, he was down to like 25 hit points when he landed, and he was at like 3x normal hit points a couple rounds later. Of course he also stopped being a ranger anymore somewhere around that point... (I think it might have been the armor that sucked the life out of the forest to give him more hit points, lol).

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Hmmm, I don't know where the thread went in the 10 pages I skipped, lol.

I look at it this way. I think the 4e sort of high durability characters that can bounce back with a bit of planning create a fun sort of game. I see a lot more risk taking and big awesome moments than in the "you're made of glass" days of 1e.

OTOH there's nothing wrong with 'survival dungeoneering' play where you spend most of your time carefully planning out how to deal with things because slipping on a banana peel might be fatal. Any of us that played 'back in the day' (whenever that was for you) has done it. Clearly we all must have found it enjoyable at some level or we'd have gone and done something else.

I'm still getting a good kick out of the high action level 4e play right now. It won't hurt my feelings any if you can reliably get either experience from 5e. I sort of worry that M&M may be writing off my favorite play style though. Either that or they may not really understand what enables it very well. We'll see though.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

It's not even about simulationists breaking teeth, I don't think. It's about people trying to satisfy their simulationinst sensibilities using an engine that - at certain key points, like the hp rules - doesn't work that way. And is precisely designed not to work that way!

For those who want deadly falls and poison but non-deadly giant's clubs, maybe what they need is a system of dodge bonuses, where dodging acts as damage reduction in some fashion. (The most obvious way to simulate hit points would be a level-based divisor.)

But then new corner cases will come up, as they always do (say in W/V) systems: what happens to someone chained to the rockface and breathed on by the dragon, for instance? Looks like certain death to me (a la staring at a Medusa) - yet Gygax expressly calls this out (in his DMG) as a circumstance in which a saving throw is allowed!

Not even simulationists, but immersionists. This is classic disconnect between "immersion is priority one" verus "narrative is priority one". We all talk about it in terms of characterization, and thus seem to be communicating, but the characterization means something very different in each case. The argument is as old as "method acting" and whatever that opposing version is called. I forget.

I'll just state this baldly: I don't want to get so far inside the head of an NPC or my PC that I lose the awareness of the metagame (mechanically or otherwise). I don't want anyone at my table to do so. I don't even want to play with anyone who sees this as a priority--because there is no way that both of us will have a good time. Better that one of us go elsewhere, and have fun with people who have different priorities. And for ever comment along the lines of, "hate to think what you are missing with that attitude," here is a big, "back at ya, big guy!"

 

[triqui]

Which is why I said "In other fiction, I'll just kill all the guys with guns. They'll miss, I'll win" in the quote you replied to. I also said:


I want the option. That's all. As always, play what you like

There are different kinds of fiction, that's for sure. In reallistic fiction, you shouldn't be able to kill 12 guys with crossbows. However, in realistic fiction, you shouldnt be able to kill a dragon either. Becouse, otherwise, that implies that 12 guys with crossobows can kill a dragon.

D&D is a game with a fiction that states that people can kill dragons, fighters can grapple bears, and clerics can pray for miracles. You are asking for something that goes against the very foundation of the game: the leveling system. You start fighting kobolds, and finish killing Balors.

Yup, it is possible to make characters that fear a patrol of random militia with crossbows. But the cost of that, is being unable to beat dragons, demons and hydras. I doubt it is the path that WotC is going to take.