Jason Bulmahn Speaks about DDXP(His take on the system)

[Zinegata]

No, there is more variety because number of attacks = number of attacks +1 if basic attacks are included. Further, this also means actions that provoke OAs are less dangerous than otherwise, encouraging people to take risks.

I thought most At-Wills aren't useable for OAs?

Still, good point - it could very well be to encourage risk-taking.

You mean, like this one?

Yep, it counts now.

 

[hong]

I thought most At-Wills aren't useable for OAs?

Exactly. Do keep track of the pointless argumentation, please.

Yep, it counts now.

I thought you were going to let me declare myself the winner?

 

[Zinegata]

Exactly. Do keep track of the pointless argumentation, please.

Actually, I'll just keep track of the insights.

I thought you were going to let me declare myself the winner?

*shrugs* Whatever.

 

[kristov]

2 things

#1. good read.

#2. i really do believe that if pazio doesnt jump on the 4e wagon and ride it with WOTC they will tank.

This will be true for most publishers out there. fact is our wonderful gaming market is really quite small and its hard hard hard to make a living in it without following along with the big dogs.

I havent played 4e and am not saying I approve of it, but seriously, business sense kicks in and says this isnt a choice. You don't bite the hand that feeds you unless your tired of being fed.

 

[Shadeydm]

At-will is not there to solve "one spell for the right occasion". At-will is there to solve "no spells at all".

This was already addressed in 3.x its called a reserve feat.

 

[Simon Marks]

This was already addressed in 3.x its called a reserve feat.

Really?
A non-core feat in a book I don't own that hasn't been released in the OGL?

Solved all my problems.

 

[Shadeydm]

I do this better than you.


Isn't this fun?

Indeed, if there was an ENie Award for meaasageboard asshat of the year it wold be named after Hong.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Moderator/

Hong and Zinegata

Having had a whole page of what I shall loosely term discussion between yourselves, I think it is time for you two to stop replying to each other at this point in the thread.

Thanks

 

[Shadeydm]

Really?
A non-core feat in a book I don't own that hasn't been released in the OGL?

Solved all my problems.

Yes its true they like to make money, don't expect this to change with the new edition making money will still be the name of the game sounds like the OGL will be significantly changed as well so don't get your hopes up for free rules etc.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Yes its true they like to make money, don't expect this to change with the new edition making money will still be the name of the game sounds like the OGL will be significantly changed as well so don't get your hopes up for free rules etc.

He didn't say anything about it having to be free. But if it is not opened in the OGL or GSL, no other publisher can use it. So it's only useable in a small subset of situations. It can't be referenced in an OGL module (either by a NPC using it, or by the author addressing how this ability might or might not be applied in a certain situation), and it can't be built upon in other modules. That is a limitation.

And furthermore, it being "non-core" points out that it is "patch" to 3E, and can have unforseen problems. If it's build into the system from the get-go, such problems can be better accounted for.