Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6097524" data-attributes="member: 82106">Which is my own solution as well, though honestly the ranged attacks thing hasn't even come up from what I can remember. Likewise I've had a few situations where &quot;no you can't push that swarm of rats with a sword&quot; or other similar things have come up. You have to be careful not to fall into the &quot;magic can do it all, martial sucks&quot; trap though. The DMG/PHB could have of course clearly spelled this out as the intended mode of play where it was explained that powers effects are just generalized conditions that you can and will extend and modify for specific narrative reasons. You COULD run into problems with narrative munchkinism (people refluffing powers to make them more effective) but as a DM I'd feel perfectly free to nip that in the bud, or maybe just hit them with enough limitations/consequences to keep it in line (not always a sure thing, but certainly if you have 30+ years of DMing experience quite doable). It obviously might not be the easiest game for newbie DMs played that way, but OTOH I doubt too many newbie players are going to push you too far in that direction.Yeah, MHRP of course has a very extensive and tight set of shared expectations going right down to the low level details of a lot of stuff. I think D&amp;D does too, if you consider say 'classic' D&amp;D. Each spell has a certain set expectations around it, each class feature, item, etc. Its not totally consistent but neither are comics. Of course 3.x and 4e players have a bit different shared lexicon. 3e is closer to classic D&amp;D in that respect (it has the same basic spells and class mechanics are certainly closer), but I think sufficient agreement is mostly possible. It certainly isn't worse than things like different table rulings in 1e.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 6097524, member: 82106"] Which is my own solution as well, though honestly the ranged attacks thing hasn't even come up from what I can remember. Likewise I've had a few situations where "no you can't push that swarm of rats with a sword" or other similar things have come up. You have to be careful not to fall into the "magic can do it all, martial sucks" trap though. The DMG/PHB could have of course clearly spelled this out as the intended mode of play where it was explained that powers effects are just generalized conditions that you can and will extend and modify for specific narrative reasons. You COULD run into problems with narrative munchkinism (people refluffing powers to make them more effective) but as a DM I'd feel perfectly free to nip that in the bud, or maybe just hit them with enough limitations/consequences to keep it in line (not always a sure thing, but certainly if you have 30+ years of DMing experience quite doable). It obviously might not be the easiest game for newbie DMs played that way, but OTOH I doubt too many newbie players are going to push you too far in that direction. Yeah, MHRP of course has a very extensive and tight set of shared expectations going right down to the low level details of a lot of stuff. I think D&D does too, if you consider say 'classic' D&D. Each spell has a certain set expectations around it, each class feature, item, etc. Its not totally consistent but neither are comics. Of course 3.x and 4e players have a bit different shared lexicon. 3e is closer to classic D&D in that respect (it has the same basic spells and class mechanics are certainly closer), but I think sufficient agreement is mostly possible. It certainly isn't worse than things like different table rulings in 1e. [/QUOTE]

Verification