Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Igwilly" data-source="post: 7214514" data-attributes="member: 6801225">I actually agree with the OP in his point.Leaving Mummy Rot aside…I’m reading AD&D 2e right now, and many special nasty effects clearly got a lot weaker with time. Gaze attacks, petrification, monster’s charm effects, rust monsters, anti-magic fields, magic jar, instant death, paralyzing effects, and the almighty energy drain and aging effects, among others. It’s really a shame because I like these nasty things and I think it would make 4e better – it would make it more dangerous, and strategy would matter more, etc.However, diseases have a chronic problem in D&D: they’re too easy to revert it by just using magic! Seriously, even though PC adventurers are supposed to be top tier people in their field, usually it’s just a minor inconvenience.The various disease phases in 4e were a great idea, save perhaps being able to heal it fully by yourself. In some cases, it should be possible, but not in many others. However, unless the DC is significantly higher than normal for your level, it’s often easy to just wait, especially with the Heal skill. Cure Disease got more dangerous if you try to solve problems too high for your level, and there’s a cost in this ritual, so I think it’s in the right direction. However, if the disease is more “appropriate” for you level, Cure Disease is safe and even waiting for the disease to pass away is a good option. Now, I don’t know how 5e handles this, because I don’t like 5e but if it has a solution for the following problem I would listen: In the end, curing diseases is one of the magical effects D&D has underestimated for far too long time. Another prime example is teleportation (4e actually helped a lot with teleportation).The problem with difficulty in 4e is not that you cannot make it harder – it’s stupidly easy to make things difficult. The problem is regarding to threats you are supposed to face in level X: they just aren’t difficult enough. An even level encounter usually is too easy, same with even level diseases, same with even level traps. It’s all on easy mode.Addendum: I don’t know if this was clear, but going back to “nasty stuff” issue:This was a great reason why some enemies were so feared. Together with the overall state of things, this fear has – with reason – diminished. For example: While I was looking at 4e’s stats for the Beholder, I just felt “it’s not that strong. I mean, it’s high level, but not impressive”. However, looking at 2e’s version, I thought, “this guy is a monster!” Really, it’s very powerful and much more dreadful than posterior versions. I used the beholder because back in 2009-2010 or so, a previous 4e supporter just got maddened because he introduced a beholder in his adventure for his novice players, and the encounter was a cakewalk. They did not have this impression of power and fear. Nope, just another monster for the day. However, it isn’t the only one: the monsters who had those nasty effects simply weren’t so much of a challenge in 4e and, in turn, were not that dreadful.</blockquote>

Verification