Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tymophil" data-source="post: 5754920" data-attributes="member: 46923">Once again, I am not impressed by Monte Cook's column. As someone else said, he seemed to have missed years of game development thinking.I think that D&D4 is not less pausible/realistc whatever than any other versions. In fact, I firmly believe this is the first edition where one could play something close to the journey of the Fellowship of the Ring. That is not realistic, but can produce a good tale to play.But, there is one thing that D&D 4th Edition failed to do : translate its mechanisms into concepts that are clear for the players, and the game masters. For someone used to D&D, fourth edition doesn't make not much sense at first. Those hit points don't represent what they used to, this funny push effect, those strange healings by using combat powers... It's all weird.But weird doesn't mean that that it cannot make sense in a "realistc" way. It is all a question of defining the effect in a believable way. After all, the Armour Class doen't make much sense and yet it is accepted. While healing surges are not, and they could make as much sense. It is, in my humbe opinion, because the AC is in D&D from day one, while the Healing Surge is a new kid on the block.It would not have been wasted space to give a few lines to describe how a power would be described in a "realistic" way. Then, a new concept for hit point could have been defined. A cleric can inspire his mates by performing deeds clearly showing that his Diety is on their side (and raise their confidence, ie hp). A fighter display of might makes his enemies withdraw in fear, and so on...I really miss designer notes in D&D...</blockquote>

Verification