I know that this is tough for some...

[Mithreinmaethor]

But we really need to take out and throw away our 3.0/3.5 brains. When we read and play 4.0 we need to be totally rid of that mentality. I sit here and read and read and read where people have taken this mentality and have tried to twist every last word of something in 4.0 to break it or make it more advantageous to them.

Step back and just take the reading as it is. Dont try and manipulate it take it at its simplest meaning.

Does that mean that there are things that are written poorly etc. No but those are few and far in between compared to the "let me twist this to break it" posts.

Like I said, do the frontal lobotomy and remove all that 3.X junk. Start fresh and stop trying to twist it. Just play and have fun

 

[Khime]

I played 3.5 once, never played 3.0, and I still have the same questions and confusions as many of the people who seem to be trying to figure out how the rules should work (or "trying to manipulate and twist the rules", as you put it).

 

[Runestar]

Some parts of the rules (such as divine challenge) are just that vague and ambiguous enough to offer the possibility of multiple differing interpretations, each of which appear to be equally viable in their own right.

Looks like your take on "trying to manipulate the rules" seems to be us simply having differing takes on the same rule than you. It is entirely possible that RAI may prevent a spell from working properly (eg: should you be able to use icy terrain on a flying enemy? RAI says no, the FAQ entry on tripping oozes suggests yes). In the very least, I don't feel that "going with RAI" alone is sufficient to resolve all these issues. There certainly is a place for such meaningful debate, so that at the end of the day, we are in a position to make informed decisions about the way we want to interpret a certain rule (and know enough of the mechanics to recognize the rammifications of imposing it the way we do).

 

[Nail]

But we really need to take out and throw away our 3.0/3.5 brains. When we read and play 4.0 we need to be totally rid of that mentality. I sit here and read and read and read where people have taken this mentality and have tried to twist every last word of something in 4.0 to break it or make it more advantageous to them.

??

I'm not sure where your rant wants to go. Are you ranting about people using the 4e rules for the most advantage, or are you claiming that people are interpreting 4e rules using 3e concepts? It's very unclear.

A good rant has a single, clear, grating point. See if you can't straighten your rant out a bit.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Putting a new ruleset through the ringer is the only way to straighten out the kinks. Its kind of like.. you know, what open playtesting is supposed to do.

 

[DLichen]

I don't know, I can certainly think of a few cases where despite poorly written rules on the subject, any reasonable person can come up with the same conclusion, ie two handed fighting rules and how it pertains to rogue weapon talent.

The only way to avoid those rules debates would be for WotC to write D&D rules the same way as they write comprehensive rules of Magic: The Gathering, or at least present a set of comprehensive rules that adjusts to all future powers and additions which I have heard opposition to since it can stifle the DM.

 

[Roland55]

But we really need to take out and throw away our 3.0/3.5 brains. When we read and play 4.0 we need to be totally rid of that mentality. I sit here and read and read and read where people have taken this mentality and have tried to twist every last word of something in 4.0 to break it or make it more advantageous to them.

Step back and just take the reading as it is. Dont try and manipulate it take it at its simplest meaning.

Does that mean that there are things that are written poorly etc. No but those are few and far in between compared to the "let me twist this to break it" posts.

Like I said, do the frontal lobotomy and remove all that 3.X junk. Start fresh and stop trying to twist it. Just play and have fun

1) No, it's not junk. It's just another way to play. No need to demean it.

2) I suspect you're basically right. I think it is best to approach 4E from a completely fresh perspective.

3) Unfortunately, this does NOT help me as I try to convince my RPG friends to try out 4E with me. Imagine this:
Me: "Let's play 4E -- it's a great D&D game with fresh mechanics and it's even balanced."
Friend: "Maybe. Can I use my old character concepts?"
Me: "There are some guidelines we can use to freshen that old concept up and bring it into 4E. However, uhhh, let me tell you about the need to approach play 'from a totally new perspective'."

That last part is not helping me convince my friends 4E is still D&D. Oh well, I guess it's just a tactical disadvantage.

 

[ac_noj]

I sit here and read and read and read where people have taken this mentality and have tried to twist every last word of something in 4.0 to break it or make it more advantageous to them.

This is a rules clarification forum. It's very purpose is to discuss the finer points of some less than clear rules.

 

[Muddyboots]

It is best to try to approach ANY new rules set with an open mind. That said, the exposure to other rule systems can often help you figure out what is intended in the one in front of you. It doesn't matter if you have experience with everything from the wood grain box on through 3.5 and clear understanding of a dozen plus rpg systems, 4E confusing. It isn't radical either. The game mechanic is pretty clear and rather homogenous (is that what "balanced" means now?) The things that keep turning up are the same type of stuff people got annoyed at with some of the small D20 publishers.

Muddyboots

 

[Kzach]

I agree with the OP.

I think there are a lot of people who just like to be argumentative and prove a point no matter how disingenuous they are being in the process. And then there are the people who will squeeze out every advantage they can, because they mistakenly believe that power in game translates to power outside of the game.

But then again, you'll always get people like that so not much point arguing with them.