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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ratskinner" data-source="post: 5898499" data-attributes="member: 6688937">I agree. I'm not sure how they do that with such a core part of the game, but I suspect its possible. I've mentioned in other threads that I'm curious to see how this eventually works. I think there's general agreement that starting from simple and adding complexity is the way to go. I think its an open question whether there is a similar "direction" between CaW and CaS.I'm only speaking of superiority in effect, not RP experience. You can be a great fighter in the ring, but the guy who sneaks up on you with a shotgun still wins. (I watch American Football, I don't think it'd be as enjoyable is the players were allowed to bring weapons.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Others may disagree.)My original point was that in earlier editions, magic was the shotgun. I was expressing my opinion that most of the things that you can do to make D&D's abstract combat system more interesting for the fighter tend to be CaS. If magical combat effects in 5e go back to more CaW effects (Stopping Time, Holding, flat out Save or Die, etc.), then I suspect the LFQW problem will resurrect itself. Hopefully, I'm wrong.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> ::Sigh:: Dial down the edition war sensitivity, man. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f60e.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":cool:" title="Cool    :cool:"  data-smilie="6"data-shortname=":cool:" />I'm not taking shots at 4e. 4e doesn't address roleplaying ruleswise any more or less than the other editions, AFAICT. D&D has always played a little loose and undefined in that area. 4e Characters are CaS machines because that was how they were intentionally designed, its one of 4e's selling points. (Reduction of SoD, everybody has interesting maneuvers, etc.) Its integral to how they balanced the classes. Making the math transparent and all that, plus the actual math (an appropriate-level monster should take X hits before dying, etc.) are all CaS. The way 4e sets up combat to go "like so", is no different than the NFL or MLB changing rules to limit or encourage certain types of events or results in the game.And, just to be clear. THAT ISN'T INHERENTLY A BAD OR GOOD WAY TO PLAY D&D. However, the fact that 5e is even attempting to "reunite" the player base or whatever-ya-wanna-call-it, indicates that that didn't go down so hot with the D&D public as a whole. I like 4e, but currently I'm alone amongst my gaming group in that regard, and have been for a few years. That's okay with me, because I'm not as married to any particular edition as a lot of folks seem to be.  Hopefully the above will indicate some of why I think it applies. I agree about the description. While I didn't explicitly say so when introducing the idea, I think this is one of the things that made the Fighter, "the toughest class to design." Maybe, but I'm not sure who's using it as a litmus test for a game. Part of the mechanical design issue is that a lot of CaW takes place outside of combat (sabotage, setting up ambushes, subverting allies, etc.) So, to some extent, CaW is served by making the Fighter more viable in the other pillars.  Oh, I mostly agree with you here, and its part of my point. The fundamental problem with the way D&D has traditionally viewed Wizards....as PCs/protagonists. Wizards as anything but a Deus Ex Machina or villain are a relatively recent phenomenon in genre, IMO.  So, in a fairy tale, a grumpy enchantress turns you into a frog until you get a kiss from a princess. That's not Combat as anything, but take away the narrative context, and Polymorph is suddenly a CaW effect. Magic in narratives where the Wizard is the protagonist tends to be much more limited, unreliable,  and often has tremendous "backlash" of one kind or another.  3e made magic much more reliable and removed almost all the "backlash" from previous versions...exacerbating the LFQW problem. Anyway, I hope that makes my points clearer.</blockquote>

Verification