Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Andor" data-source="post: 4158360" data-attributes="member: 1879">I haven't said any such thing about 4e. I haven't seen 4e. It's not out yet. I would be an idiot to make declarative statements about something of which I have only seen tiny tidbits. This is a discussion about 'rules as physics' which to me means whether or not the rules closely portray what the characters are experiencing within their world. I feel that if there is a disconnect between what the rules portray and what the GM thinks is happening such that the rules do not allow me to closely understand what my character is experiencing then it detracts from the experience of the game in the same way that an out of focus projector detracts from the experience of watching a movie. A hypothetical example drawn from what may or may not be true in 4e, based on speculation drawn from the back of a DDM card is the existence of a monster ability that allows one to use a mundane weapon in a nonmagical way that cannot be replicated by a player character. If this is the case (and neither you nor I have the slightest idea if it is or not) it will detract from my opinion of the game if there is not an in game rational for why a hobgoblin can use a pogostick while my character cannot.</blockquote>