Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Uller" data-source="post: 5632650" data-attributes="member: 413">Hahahaha...your &quot;reasonable abstraction&quot; has higher granularity than the event you are modeling...I prefer it if the game designers leave RP 'rules' out.&nbsp; The DM is free to say there is no way you can take that skill...the rules of every version make that clear.So for a 12th level 3e character this is simply a game imbalancer...but what about epic level characters?&nbsp; One that has taken the Demigod path...maybe it could be a power called &quot;Father is Angry&quot;...Seriously...I already understand that rules can be dissociated.&nbsp; I think they all are if you did deep enough.&nbsp; I just don't care.&nbsp; Another example:&nbsp; HP.&nbsp; Does your fighter know that he only has 10 HP left?&nbsp; Does he decide to not charge into the horde of monsters based on that knowledge?&nbsp; If yes, it is metagaming.&nbsp; So how is it not metagaming if the fighter knows that his high damaging attack that he can pull off sometimes is a daily?&nbsp; I just look at it as something he can rarely do under fairly rare circumstances.&nbsp; The game designers COULD have modeled this with recharges or some other mechanic that works out to it being used roughly once per day...instead they just make it a daily.&nbsp; (for the record, I prefer the essentials fighter, rogue, ranger and paladin classes that don't have many dailies...but I don't get my knickers in a twist of the PHB versions)Why should it? I don't need to know how a wizard casts Magic Missile.&nbsp; I don't need to know how a rogue picks a lock.&nbsp; I don't need to know how a fighter disrupts and enemy attack.The game world is modeled with discreet temporal units of rounds and turns and discreet spatial units of 5' squares.&nbsp; Just like with molecular models...the characters position on the map isn't where he is at specific point in time...it is where he probably is during the current round.&nbsp; My bottom line is this:&nbsp; D&amp;D is a heroic RPG.&nbsp; Heroic RPGs rely heavily on combat to make them fun.&nbsp; I really really really don't mind that combat in 4e (and 3e) has combat rules that &quot;feel&quot; like a skirmish war game.&nbsp; If you mind, that's fine, but I see no reason to try to convince people that it is because it's rules are not connected to the game world.&nbsp; It is because the rules are becoming more and more discreet (For instance, I like the spells in 3e and early much better than 4e...I like it when a DM must adjudicate spells intelligently and players can come up with strange combinations of spell effects that do unexpected things...but that is not 4e...in 4e,a spell has exactly the effect it says it does...nothing less,nothing more and no adjudication required).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Uller, post: 5632650, member: 413"] Hahahaha...your "reasonable abstraction" has higher granularity than the event you are modeling... I prefer it if the game designers leave RP 'rules' out. The DM is free to say there is no way you can take that skill...the rules of every version make that clear. So for a 12th level 3e character this is simply a game imbalancer...but what about epic level characters? One that has taken the Demigod path...maybe it could be a power called "Father is Angry"... Seriously...I already understand that rules can be dissociated. I think they all are if you did deep enough. I just don't care. Another example: HP. Does your fighter know that he only has 10 HP left? Does he decide to not charge into the horde of monsters based on that knowledge? If yes, it is metagaming. So how is it not metagaming if the fighter knows that his high damaging attack that he can pull off sometimes is a daily? I just look at it as something he can rarely do under fairly rare circumstances. The game designers COULD have modeled this with recharges or some other mechanic that works out to it being used roughly once per day...instead they just make it a daily. (for the record, I prefer the essentials fighter, rogue, ranger and paladin classes that don't have many dailies...but I don't get my knickers in a twist of the PHB versions) Why should it? I don't need to know how a wizard casts Magic Missile. I don't need to know how a rogue picks a lock. I don't need to know how a fighter disrupts and enemy attack. The game world is modeled with discreet temporal units of rounds and turns and discreet spatial units of 5' squares. Just like with molecular models...the characters position on the map isn't where he is at specific point in time...it is where he probably is during the current round. My bottom line is this: D&D is a heroic RPG. Heroic RPGs rely heavily on combat to make them fun. I really really really don't mind that combat in 4e (and 3e) has combat rules that "feel" like a skirmish war game. If you mind, that's fine, but I see no reason to try to convince people that it is because it's rules are not connected to the game world. It is because the rules are becoming more and more discreet (For instance, I like the spells in 3e and early much better than 4e...I like it when a DM must adjudicate spells intelligently and players can come up with strange combinations of spell effects that do unexpected things...but that is not 4e...in 4e,a spell has exactly the effect it says it does...nothing less,nothing more and no adjudication required). [/QUOTE]

Verification