Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aegeri" data-source="post: 5509700" data-attributes="member: 78116">I would respond by saying: Too bad for them. Time to prove your a real hero by dealing with whatever limited strength you have remaining.This doesn't make sense to me. In terms of who gets hit more easily on fort - therefore most likely to actually end up poisoned (minding not all poison effects target fort at the same time, but theoretically) by epic the wizard is classically boned. I'm talking a 2+ scenario of being hit on his fort, because his fort will absolutely tank without a heavy feat investment. The Barbarian at the same time will likely tank Will himself, so the Wizard is going to get hammered by effects on fort and the Barbarian will be hammered by effects on will.Poison effects tend to be fort (and forced movement) and dominate/stun etc are tending towards will.Hey, that's what you'd expect them to be better at! So again, I'm just not seeing what the exact issue is, other than again - it's the attackers onus and not the defenders in 4E.High level masterwork armor in 4E can actually boost various defenses and give DR as well. As for what AC and such represent, I don't recall ever reading that is purely about avoiding being hit - but avoiding whatever the effect was. If your armor holds back the blow that is just as good as the creature wafting at the air so hard it doesn't matter. It's also perfectly sufficient from a narrative point of view.Which is rather irrelevant, because if you're looking at choking gas or a massive creatures chelicerae ripping into you like butter hitting wasn't relevant to begin with. Your ability to hold your breath or out muscle the creatures jaws away was far more important. You think of combat as an incredibly narrow "I hit and you miss" affair, which is just rather boring actually. To me when the fighter is missed narrowly by the giant spider trying to poison him (A vs. fort attack), he muscled the creature out of the way after violently struggling with its chelicerae and forelegs. Not that he wasn't actually in risk of being hit - it simply wasn't strong enough to overcome how beefy he is.That's a much more interesting image to me than "Oh you miss. Oh I hit" and everything in existence being a variation of that. Maybe it even got its chelicerae most of the way into the fighters armor, but couldn't get it all the way because he's just so badass he pushed them back out before they got further. Much more invigorating an image in combat.I just flat out disagree with this and think it's caused by your narrow perceptions of what attacks in combat actually do. I mean the rogue might be nimble - how is that relevant resisting burning acid that is literally burning off the mucous membranes protecting his eyes, ears, nose and throat? I don't care how much dexterity you have, you're going to be hit by that acidic gas and the only thing that is relevant is how strong your constitution is to hold off the damage.So should the ability of martial heroes by their sheer force of their own strength, stamina or dexterity. So should the ability of psionic characters by sheer force of their will. So should the ability of those who use dark spirits to gain their power.I mean, I don't see a lick of difference in any of those at all. All the same to me and all equally as improbable - so I don't mind any of it. "Magic should be the only thing that's special!?!!" is not really that convincing an argument to me from the get go.I don't remember Hercules using a lot of magic to accomplish many of the feats he did - yet he did. They slew fantastic monsters and did improbable things, yet we like to pretend they don't deserve a place at the table of fantastic because what they did wasn't outright magical.Now THAT is nonsense.Basically "Why aren't casters just flat out better than the stupid guy with a sword?". The reason I say this is because my definition of "impressive mundane" is probably somewhere around the Olympics - but many martial characters can do things far greater than that with their most basic powers.That's not really an argument that seems fair to martial characters - it's basically stacking the deck then declaring yourself a winner when all the cards are your own.In other words, why do martial characters deserve to do what my wizard does? Well it's very simple: Because they deserve to and their exploits have just as much justification in fantasy as your wizard.Again, this isn't a convincing argument to me - unless you happen to have detailed physics equations that magic is trying to simulate from real life (nobody does) then I don't see why magic should be special above everyone else. Someone making a ball of fire out of thin air is no more illogical to me, than someone using hidden reserves of strength to jump off a high cliff and cleaving an enemy brutally in two.</blockquote>

Verification