Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Storm-Bringer" data-source="post: 4153259" data-attributes="member: 57832">I am going to address these bullets here: - Poison doing ability damage causes poisons to be much more dangerous than they need to be.As opposed to poisons that arent' very dangerous at all?  I mean, of the poisonous substances in the world, a good many of them are simply lethal.  No saving throw.  Certain spider poison will cause necrosis of tissues for months or years after the initial bite.  - Grappling giving a size bonus meant that large creatures would nearly always succeed on grapple checks since they would also have very high strength values and a CR appropriate Bab.So, an Ancient Dragon should have roughly the same chance to grapple as a Kobold? - Ability bonuses being tied into so many different things that changing a score via a buff or a poison / ability drain would require a bunch of recalculation.Only when you used them.  I understand 4e has a crapload of overlapping auras and such that need to be adjusted and re-calculated during combat.  Much higher handle time. - Monsters playing by exactly the same rules would often result in more book keeping than would be ideal.DMs who are forced at gunpoint to stat out every goblin child in the game world will be faced with a great deal of bookkeeping.  DMs who wisely stat out major NPCs only will not have a substantial task ahead of them. - Monsters getting abilities that make sense flavor wise but are meaningless in actual game play.Such as? - A skill system that guaranteed it would be impossible to have a skill based challenge that would be reasonable for everyone in the party to have to attempt.How is that bad?  Is Rope Use really applicable when negotiating with a sphinx?  Will Diplomacy really help you detect a trap better? - The implementation of Disarm / Sunder / BullRush essentially being crappy.In your estimation.  Much like Grapple, some have problems, others don't. - Mounted combat that leads to a 'kill the horse' strategy always being the best.Which, historically, was the best strategy.  How is this a problem?Because that isn't a 'mount', that is an M-1 Abrams Main Battle Tank.  You don't sound like you want a reasonable chance of a mount surviving, you want Geico for your horse.  If you don't want to lose a horse in combat, tie it up back and the camp and hike over to the battle.I don't remember when common sense applications of rules became the ultimate in bad GMing, but it is a particularly odd development, in my mind.</blockquote>

Verification