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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 5331322" data-attributes="member: 87792">I'm now going to ask you a simple question: Have you ever played 4e with a group that liked the game? Because you sure don't understand it from your list.  You mean use magic items not in PHB1,2,3, Adventurer's Vault 1 or 2, Primal/Martial/Arcane/Divine/Psionic Power, either DMG, or any world guide? And then don't use the new Essentials item rarity rules? As for not creating magic items, next you'll tell me not to create homebrew monsters.  Your only point on the list.  Changing exps is a simple tweak with far reaching consequences. As for encounters, the goal is to play in a specific style. You can play in that style without setting encounters for it?  Unnecessary.  How about none? But homebrew traps are now banned? I guess I'll just have to put away Grimtooth's Traps.  Wait, what? 4e works fine with multiple monsters and attacks in waves. This reads like something you've read on a message board and not actually understood. The problem is with locking down solos. And that's because a solo is approximately 80%+ of the enemy force in a given fight most of the time. Giving simple debuffs a disproportionate effect. (Stun an elite and a regular monster and on average half the enemy is still fighting that round. Stun a solo and all that's left for the round is his minions and traps).  Already been done by the official (Essentials) rules.  And once more you demonstrate a lack of understanding of 4e rules even from the earliest books. Cancer would be an obvious use of the condition track (normally poisons/diseases).  It depends why. Because I'm not telling them "forget it, I'm not using it". I'm telling them "I want to run a game in this style. Here's what I think will make the mechanics fit the rules."  4e is more robust than people give it credit for. So are most games.  Wait, what?   I've got weapon breakage rules in one of my current games. From Dark Sun.  News to my Warlord. Interrupt powers, countercharges, held actions. Yes I can interrupt an enemy's power. I just need to think to do it. 0I don't have to take into effect random durations for abilities like fly. I don't have to worry about teleporting away from my destination, losing my mind when I contact an extraplanar creature, or ruining the potion in my backpack because a fireball hit me. Everything works in 4e as its intended to. Some people like this but it goes against the 1st edition feel.     Unless it's poisoned. Because many poisons use the condition track. Or it's a chute leading somewhere. Or...  Once again you are ignoring the condition track. Used by such things as Quori brain seeds, rot grubs, mummies, and lycanthropes. Fail that first recovery roll - and (a) it gets worse and (b) you now need two successes to recover.  You mean the players never read the DMG back in the day. [quot]Why should the DM go through the trouble of making his own magic items when their only purpose in the game is to give a +whatever bonus here and a duplicate of a common power?</blockquote>I don't know. But you've clearly never read AVII. Or the DMG/DMGII and artifacts. Or seen any of the new item rules.  In the same way that most +1 swords in the old rules were worthless. Right. Special pleading.  Rules that came from the DMGII. And because the math was clear I drew houserules that predated that.  "The AD&D feel?" What? Monty Haul?   Except the DMG 2. And Dark Sun. And that's off the top of my head.  Congratulations. There's no game you are allowed to houserule even if you understand the consequences.  So tell them upfront. They will expect it if you tell them what you are doing and why.  The whole point is to make combat less rewarding. I'm not suggesting changing the size of encounters. Just the reward the PCs get at the end.  So apparently you can not put treasure in an adventure? And consider yourself able to run an old school game? Parcels are merely a means of keeping score.  That's why you keep them simple and clear. Which is what I'm proposing. Mangling subtle numbers so everyone trips over themselves is a problem. Also: Calling Raven Crowking - 100 pages of house rules, wasn't it?  AD&D was as far as I know, almost never run straight out of the book.  And how many games do you know that ran from 1-20 in previous editions?  And by doing so elegantly changed the feel.  See above for quite how wrong your list was. I quoted two. Changing identify is a third. [quotre]Mouse Guard's similarities with Burning Wheel end at how you throw the dice and simplified combat, making up about 20 total pages. 4e's basic rules include 16 pages of races, 112 pages of classes, 14 pages of skills, 18 pages of feats, 45 pages of equipment, and 29 pages of combat. If I wanted to make derivitive product or change the way the game plays and feels, I'd need to alter the contents of your average RPG.[/quote] I'll add exception based design to the list of things you don't quite get.  The tactical options are just that. Tactical. Once weapons are drawn. And you only have a few seconds to think. Outside combat, 4e is rules light.  Straw man. The red box also points out that hiding in the wagon would be stupid. That the goblins would find you anyway so you'd have to fight. Straw man twice over. The red box does give you an option to hide and stab the goblins from behind. That way you end up as a rogue. Straw man three times over. You start the scenario already in danger. It's hardly throwing yourself in danger if it has come to you.  Having changed a PC into an undead flaming zombie, I can only say that this isn't the case.  Why use a BMW engine rather than one belonging to a kitbash car?  And I have listed precisely two house rules. You have added a third (item identification).  Probably.[/QUOTE]

Verification