Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 6315593" data-attributes="member: 87792">And if you do not, you do not have a leg to stand on when you object to the consequences.You do know that you can make monsters immune to being tripped at a monster-by-monster level?  The only thing you can't do is decide that all undead are immune to precision damage, so you can't knock a zombie's head off or stake a vampire through the heart.4e works better on a hex grid.  This I freely accept.HP as morale and stamina makes a lot more sense than HP as meat.On the other hand when you do not know what a vault door looks like or that only some doors have full length keyholes, you have only yourself to blame.And when it turns out that it's because they have ignored fundamental parts of the game that should be obvious on a simple reading (short rests) and have actively changed real world designs to ensure they don't work (vault doors) then they should suck it up and apologise.  Because it isn't the game not delivering what they want - it's their own mistakes.  Deep, intricate stuff that's entirely within the game is another matter.Could 4e be presented better?  Hell, yes.  Should there be more discussion on what a short rest is?  Yes.  Including options for houseruling.  But when a product comes with instructions and you ignore those instructions then a lot of the burden is on the user.  Especially when you are the only person with these specific problems.I disagree.  I believe that there are times, as here, when the misunderstandings are entirely the fault of the players concerned.  To take another example, I've had a combat that slogged on interminably because the DM added a ridiculous amount to the monster's AC so we could only hit a 4e monster on a 17 while it did comparatively little damage.  This is not a problem with the system.  This is a problem with the DM ignoring the system and doing their own thing.Problems exist in the game sometimes exist in the system, sometimes exist in the local metagame, sometimes exist with the players, and sometimes exist due to poor DMing.  You seem to want to blame bad DMing issues on the system and claim that doing this is legitimate grievances with the system.  I consider that when the system says to do one thing and you do something the system clearly says not to do to be a problem with the DMing.  And once the rules have been pointed out to continue to blame the system because you are doing the opposite of what the system says is nothing more than edition warring.You can make a mistake in honesty.  Anyone can.  And people do.  But when your mistakes are pointed out as being unambiguous mistakes, you have two choices.  Drop the argument, accepting that the mistake was yours, or edition war.  Because you have just shown that you do not care what the game actually says - you are going to pick up the stick to beat the system with irrespective of whether it has anything to do with the actual game published.  If you don't care what the game says it is impossible to engage with you - and all you are doing is talking about your personal dislike of the system that exists in your head and not actually on paper.  And if the entire usable content of what you are saying is that you dislike something and you keep on saying it then you are edition warring.  You certainly aren't adding anything useful to the discussion.This does not give them the right to make up things you literally can't do with Eladrin teleportation (like teleport through a solid vault door) and then blame that on the system.  Or to make your NPCs all idiots, not even taking precautions used in the real world.  On the other hand if you want to remove Eladrin from your version of 4e, feel free.</blockquote>

Verification