Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Instant Friends
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="MrMyth" data-source="post: 5348668" data-attributes="member: 61155"><p>Like I said, I don't have any actual experience with anything that early to really draw upon. But looking over the posted versions from earlier in the thread, the Charm spells seem long-lasting and made it pretty easy to get someone to hand over their possessions, while the Friends spells seem much shorter in duration and focused more on just increasing someone's natural reaction to the caster. </p><p> </p><p>I mean, the big abuses of the power, in my mind, have always been the ability to basically enslave personal servants, or easily use the power to claim someone's valuable possessions. I don't see any limits preventing that in earlier versions of the power. I do in the current version. </p><p> </p><p>If there are "substantially the same limits" on those abuses, what are they?</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Let me, perhaps, rephrase that. The power isn't flawed because the flaws and failures you are concerned about <em>already exist independently of the power</em>. And that, in my opinion, you can't remove those possible problems from the system without codifying and limiting the game to an extent that would introduce a <em>ton</em> of much more serious issues. </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Dude, not cool. I know you've got a smiley there, I know you are including yourself somewhat in that sentiment, but putting words in my mouth like that really isn't cool, especially when it is a sentiment I <em>really</em> disagree with. </p><p> </p><p>I'm not saying, "Anyone who can't figure out these rules deserves to have their campaign screwed up." I'm saying, "Anyone who has issues develop from this rule was <em>already likely </em>to run into similar issues with many other elements of the game."</p><p> </p><p>I've given examples of other possible issues in the game. I've asked how you would address them. You've haven't addressed or acknowledged those questions. That's fine - I'm not trying to win a debate here, I'm just trying to share my reasons for my opinion of this power. But if you aren't willing to acknowledge those points or those reasons, I'd really appreciate it if you didn't instead portray my point as something else completely. </p><p> </p><p>I <em>like</em> that 4E has a game that is accessible to new DMs, and that can be run without needing a DM to already 'know the hidden rules' and be skilled at navigating issues presented by problem powers. I don't think this power changes that, and you do - fair enough. </p><p> </p><p>But saying I don't think this is a problem power is very different from saying I think that problem powers are fine because good DMs can work around them.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MrMyth, post: 5348668, member: 61155"] Like I said, I don't have any actual experience with anything that early to really draw upon. But looking over the posted versions from earlier in the thread, the Charm spells seem long-lasting and made it pretty easy to get someone to hand over their possessions, while the Friends spells seem much shorter in duration and focused more on just increasing someone's natural reaction to the caster. I mean, the big abuses of the power, in my mind, have always been the ability to basically enslave personal servants, or easily use the power to claim someone's valuable possessions. I don't see any limits preventing that in earlier versions of the power. I do in the current version. If there are "substantially the same limits" on those abuses, what are they? Let me, perhaps, rephrase that. The power isn't flawed because the flaws and failures you are concerned about [I]already exist independently of the power[/I]. And that, in my opinion, you can't remove those possible problems from the system without codifying and limiting the game to an extent that would introduce a [I]ton[/I] of much more serious issues. Dude, not cool. I know you've got a smiley there, I know you are including yourself somewhat in that sentiment, but putting words in my mouth like that really isn't cool, especially when it is a sentiment I [I]really[/I] disagree with. I'm not saying, "Anyone who can't figure out these rules deserves to have their campaign screwed up." I'm saying, "Anyone who has issues develop from this rule was [I]already likely [/I]to run into similar issues with many other elements of the game." I've given examples of other possible issues in the game. I've asked how you would address them. You've haven't addressed or acknowledged those questions. That's fine - I'm not trying to win a debate here, I'm just trying to share my reasons for my opinion of this power. But if you aren't willing to acknowledge those points or those reasons, I'd really appreciate it if you didn't instead portray my point as something else completely. I [I]like[/I] that 4E has a game that is accessible to new DMs, and that can be run without needing a DM to already 'know the hidden rules' and be skilled at navigating issues presented by problem powers. I don't think this power changes that, and you do - fair enough. But saying I don't think this is a problem power is very different from saying I think that problem powers are fine because good DMs can work around them. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Instant Friends
Top