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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lizard" data-source="post: 4442259" data-attributes="member: 1054">There are gradients.My point is not that SOD should not be required; it's that 4e makes it HARDER than perhaps it should be. Rogue causes 10d6 damage (3e) to an Elder Wyrm with a dagger: Yeah, sure, he slit open its jugular vein or something.Rogue causes 6d8 (4e) sneak attack damage to an iron golem...uhm, well, maybe he found a weak spot in the construction or something...OK...we can deal...Rogue manages to use poison (4e again) to kill a creature made of solid iron with no biochemistry whatsoever...uhm, say what?(Waiting for someone to think they're "clever" and say "Huh huh if you can believe in magic elves you can believe in any thing huh". The sad thing is, there's people out there who will believe that that's a legitimate response, that if one accepts one set of fantastic elements, all fantastic elements are fair game.)NO game is without its "Murphy's Rules". In GURPS, you gain a significant tactical advantage by setting yourself on fire. (-3 penalty for fighting on fire, -10 penalty for fighting in the dark). In Hero system, an average man will walk away from a five story fall the majority of the time. In BESM, a typical schoolgirl can sustain more damage than many vehicles. Etc. The difference, to my mind, is that 4e seems to not even TRY; the design intent is not to give the benefit of the doubt to "balance" over "simulation" where necessary, but to gleefully ignore simulation even when adding it in would be easy. The "Gameness" of it takes center stage and never leaves, and intrudes on play in such a way as to make it more difficult than it needs to be to lose yourself in the experience. I want to suspend disbelief; 4e has a +20 attack vs. disbelief, target is immobilized, save at -10 to end.</blockquote>

Verification