Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6257415" data-attributes="member: 42582">No one asks what an XP models? Re-read your DMG!, where Gygax explains why XP are awarded for looting rather than for training. Clearly some people thought (or think) that XP modelled learning, and therefore complained about XP-for-gold.I'm not saying that those thoughts and complaints were warranted. But I think they've clearly occurred.I agree that this is part of the genius of D&D - it mixes the ingame and metagame in a way that few other RPG designs do.From WotC's point of view, I can therefore understand why they might have though powers in 4e for all classes would fly - a martial encounter power or daily power is the same sort of thing, an action token dressed up in the trappings of ingame capabilities, stamina etc. I feel a bit sorry for them that they couldn't carry their audience with them from the damage system to the action/attack system.I don't follow this. As I think about it, DoaM means that, after the relevant period of fighting, the foe is guaranteed to be worn down at least this much. It seems to reinforce the abstraction of the attack roll, and emphasise the ineluctable power of the great weapon fighter. I don't see how it undermines the abstraction.</blockquote>