Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fenriswolf456" data-source="post: 5872571" data-attributes="member: 6687664">Sure, I just chose Die Hard since it fit (at least for me) the concept of a 4E hero who reacted realistically to hazards. As to punching out a Terminator, it all depends on how it's statted. I'd make it the equivalent of an Iron Golem. So I'd be interested in seeing a lone Paragon punching one to death. Even Epic heroes I'd be hard pressed to believe being able to (barring powers, abilities, mystical items, divine boons, etc.).  So they were afraid/ran from the low-level orc (goblin) horde why then? Aragorn and Gimli defended the bridge out of desperate necessity. They knew they were the most able for the job and like the heroes they are, stepped out to do the job. I don't think either actually expected to survive, just delay the uruk long enough for the gates to be reinforced. Otherwise, why didn't they just stay out there and hack them all down? They got the hell out of there as soon as the task was done. Gandalf by no means knew he was on equal footing with the Balrog. He stood his ground because he was the only one who could possibly delay the Balrog long enough for the rest of the party to escape. He certainly didn't look back at Aragorn and give a badass grin and a "I got this" wink. I would happily agree that LotR is a good example of Paragon level play. I wouldn't agree that any of the characers would blithely ignore in-world dangers, even mundane ones, thinking that they were so high level it would only cost them a healing surge or two. Everything was dangerous, every creature deadly and taken seriously.  That's in part the issue of this thread. If a character willingly downs an entire bottle of poison (equivalent to many doses), which should by all rights kill them, just what do we do? It seems unrealistic to me that a PC would just take some HP damage and call it a day. As 4E doesn't have saves in the sense of older editions, DMs are left with the regular 10+ save, or more likely, applying a save with a heavy negative modifier, so that while you'll likely die, there's still a chance. It was mentioned before, but the rules have been written with the idea that there's someone adjudicating the game. Negative effects and conditions have been developed in the sense that characters would not be willingly accepting of them. A poison taken unwillingly applies as normal, doing damage, prompting a save, whatever. Knowingly taken a poison should impose a greater risk (dependent on exposure, of course), just like there should be a difference between actively opposing someone trying to stab you in a face and just standing there and letting them do it. I agree that for 99% of gaming, such circumstances are not going to arise. I don't know of any character who willing jumps off a cliff. But I've certainly read of encounters with drops of over 100', or occurring adrift in primordial lava. But we have rules for stuff like being Deafened, which seems a very rare occurance. And I think it's actually more important to just have 'this is deadly lethal' rules just so that players can get out of the mindset that you can survive anything just because you're 21st level with a heap of HPs.</blockquote>

Verification