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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dausuul" data-source="post: 5756057" data-attributes="member: 58197">While I'm not fond of 4E's occasional dip into the narrativism pool, in fairness I should point out that things aren't as bad as people make them out to be. Otherwise I'd have quit 4E long ago. Come and Get It is an outlier; most powers can be narrated in the traditional way without trouble (and now even CaGI has been fixed). Pretty much all 4E undead have poison and disease immunity. As Nemesis Destiny has pointed out, fireballs can ignite objects at DM discretion. And Essentials has provided at least the option to have martial classes without the Vancian mechanic.I do want to touch on Stormonu's point about terminology though. I think that's one area where 4E could be made a lot stronger with a relatively small amount of work. The words chosen to represent in-game concepts are hugely important. When they are well-chosen, they support the concept and help players grasp the underlying mechanic. When they are ill-chosen, they're a constant drag on immersion.I honestly think the healing surge mechanic wouldn't have caused nearly as much of a ruckus if they had just called them "heroic surges" instead. "Healing surge" is an immersion-wrecker because it implies that the warlord yells at you and your wounds close. Likewise, "bloodied" could be replaced by "battered," perhaps*.[size=-2]*Although I find myself intrigued by the idea that critters without blood could be immune to bloodying. That would both improve immersion and add a neat new mechanical ability for certain monsters.[/size]</blockquote>

Verification