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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kzach" data-source="post: 4188924" data-attributes="member: 56189">...Just...Which is what I said...4e gives you the tools (skills) to represent your imagination within the system. They can replace imagination if the DM lets it, but that is a DM and group thing, not a system thing and the same thing could happen in any game, with any ruleset.Huh?That's exactly what they're saying the skill system entails. Give a reason why your skill applies to a situation and the DM determines the difficulty of success and you roll against it.The only difference here is that in AD&D you didn't have the tools within the system to do this, which put the burden on the DM to make something up on the spot.I'm going to address this as if there are two points being made and not one.Firstly, you're saying AD&D is better because it DOESN'T have any method whatsoever of addressing an issue, whereas 4e does. Right. Once again, mind-boggling. Car doesn't have brakes, so it must be better than one that does.Ooooo K.Secondly, there is nothing within the rules or even implied in the rules of 4e that prevents or limits the DM from making a ruling based on the roleplaying of a situation. In fact, I'm fairly certain I remember reading somewhere in the 3.x rules that rules should be thrown aside in favour of roleplaying through situations... but I can't reference it so it's a moot point I guess.No, you played a preview of the rules, not the system itself.Saying you played 4e is like saying you've seen the Iron Man movie 'cause you watched all three trailers.I've played and DM'd several 4e-like sessions using the rules we know about so far, but I don't consider myself to have played or DM'd 4e since nobody (except that Andy Collins bugger) has the 4e books yet.</blockquote>

Verification