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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 5755292" data-attributes="member: 2011">I had a player quit 3E because a foe using a polearm was able to do an Opportunity Attack against him, even though he was behind the foe.It bothered his sense of immersion that someone who was attacking in front of himself could suddenly swing around, not hit anyone next to him, but get a free attack against the guy sneaking up behind him. And the enemy in front of that foe does not get an Opportunity Attack for him dropping his guard by spinning around and attacking someone behind him. 3E dropping the facing rules ruined immersion for this player.Immersion is individual.I too dislike the word "realism". I like the word plausible. Does the rules make sense to the players if they were in the game world as PCs?I find many of the 4E rules do not make sense from a plausibility POV.Hot fire in a square does not melt ice in that square.Conjurations can fly because they are not affected by the environment, including gravity, not because it necessarily makes sense for them to fly.Diagonal movement is just as short as non-diagonal movement, and bursts/blasts are big cubes.The original Come and Get It could move almost any creature (unless it had a special power to negate some forced movement) as a Martial non-magical power.Martial powers allow those characters to do magical things.Warlords can shout and an unconscious ally is suddenly conscious and healed.A prone conscious guy can drop his guard and provoke an Opportunity Attack, but an unconscious guy cannot drop his guard and provoke an Opportunity Attack.Hit points are not considered actual damage (by the rationalizers) until the PC dies.To me, there will always be lines drawn in the sand. I don't like where WotC drew many of the lines because the 4E game became cartoonish in many ways. I prefer a more mature logical consistent plausible game and not one where I have to pull some stupid rationale out of my butt, just to explain away the stupidity (e.g. Daily powers). In fact, I find it vastly amusing how so many people here on these boards will take the most nonsensical illogical rationale, and explain it as if it makes all of the sense in the world, and it isn't just a cumbersome rationale to explain away a non-plausible rule that exists in the game system, merely because the rule is simpler than any plausible rule that the designers could think of to take its place.</blockquote>

Verification