Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pssthpok" data-source="post: 5053536" data-attributes="member: 34725">Hey hey, UK. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />It certainly resolves the resource management issue prevalent in 3E.Absolutely. In cases like that, though, the limitation is usually obvious and reasonable. I gather from this that you don't mind a rogue power usable only once per day, as long as the damage/effect lines up with similar powers form other sources/classes? To me, that seems a bit like cutting off your nose (verisimilitude) to spite your face (resource imbalance in older editions). Sure, it makes sense on paper... but so does communism. Well, it makes sense in a "threat management" way. It gives players the ability to "tank" monsters. Other than that, it exists as a hollow game mechanic with no reflection in the "reality" of the encounter other than a metagame constraint on the DM's tactics. Multiple marks aren't allowed because then parties of paladins would run roughshod over enemies, dealing mark damage no matter what the targets do, since they can't attack 5 people each round to avoid all the marks. Likewise, the war devil's mark would lead to crushing infernal victories as multiple war devils grant cumulative +2 to attacks by marking the same target. Ad nauseum.*sigh* houserules are no solution, really. I'm hoping for a philosophical angle to appreciating these design quirks. If all I have to do is houserule, I can keep playing my 3E/IHB hodgepodge and not have to retcon story, mechanics, cosmology, etc for my game. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I guess the main point of my post was to see how you dealt with these disconnections between what's happening at the table and what's being said/understood "in game." You seem pretty 4E happy, and you come from old D&D roots... I'm left wondering if gameplay ease is enough to placate any desire for verisimilitude at the table.I want to like 4E, I'd like to design in it (super easy, intuitive and fun), but these issues stick in my craw and I don't know if I can get past them.</blockquote>

Verification