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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Balesir" data-source="post: 5759943" data-attributes="member: 27160">Doesn't serve what purpose? You describe the purpose very well when you say it allows those at the table "to imagine it in whatever way will make it consistent for them". That is precisely the purpose I am talking about - what other purposes do you consider to be indispensible?For the most part, they do have a clear view. If, for some corner cases such as (important) objects getting destroyed by fireballs, there is more than one interpretation I don't see that as a big deal. As LostSoul has pointed out, it was never clear in earlier editions, either; I think it was 2-3 years into us playing that I even considered the possibility of flammable items getting burnt by fireballs - which would be after running AD&D for a while, at least.Characters being set on fire in 4E is known as "ongoing fire damage", by the way. Fireballs don't cause it.I didn't say "without reliance on a DM", I said "allows all the players to have a clear view of how the game world "physics" really works without reliance on DM judgement". Where there is ambiguity over the precise interpretation of the rules this clearly does not apply, but that is not really that widespread in 4E - generally the players are able to know what effect their powers will have without asking the DM for confirmation, ruling or interpretation. That exact way in which the power achieves those results may be open to interpretation, but the rules as written are usually quite clear. This clarity on the part of the players allows modes of play that are not easily achievable with older editions, or with most other systems I have played with over the years. I regard this as a positive attribute of D&D 4E - something it does that is a unique selling proposition, for me.I'm sure WotC would be very happy to have something that is popular amongst players of D&D. I would prefer them to produce something that positively supports a mode or modes of play without house rules and endless judgement calls. It's no biggie - if they go for popularity at the expense of functionality I'll just stick with what I've got. In that sense they may be well advised to do exactly this, since those who prefer whatever it was that they found to do with older editions seem unable or unwilling to do just this.Sure, but as long as everyone at the table is clear on what variant is being used, I don't really see the harm.</blockquote>

Verification