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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tovec" data-source="post: 5760613" data-attributes="member: 95493">Ignoring Darren's question for a moment. Fireball, as per the spell, has the "fire" keyword - that's what's important right 4e people? Doesn't the fire keyword mean it is "fire" and not "heat"? Just asking.Why is a world where magic works likely to be so different from the real world in any respect? The reason magic does work as it does in D&D is because the laws of the DnD world allow it. In Tolkien, as with other games, variations, alternate histories, etc. It is set ON EARTH and assumed to have the same basic principles of the real world, except magic works. As DnD is supposely based on these settings, or at least drawing inspiration from them, why is it such a leap to assume magic can work with more plausible and realistic** game mechanics?Okay, I said that I wanted a game that explains the mechanics, including minor bits that aren't as likely to come up very often. You bring up "4E universe physics" as though with that term I'm supposed to suddenly realize that I shouldn't want those things? I guess my point, which you missed so I'll say again, was that I want the game to resemble the world. Or more accurately I want a game where physics aren't "4e universe" but instead "our universe"-adjacent  including magic.Ah, thank you. Yes I do prefer the other version. Gave me more to work with and more of a justification on why it works that way. Am I satisfied with the explainable of how the other version can harm skeletons? No, but it gives me more to think about on the subject.Right, okay, but lets assume that the DM bought the system expecting 4e to actually adjudicate information, not just to give them ability blocks to distribute like crackers. Next let's assume that player 1 thinks that the ability shouldn't hit skeletons, and player 2 disagrees. As with any version of DnD, they turn to the DM. The DM scratches their head and realize they don't have an logical explanation either way and turns to the book. The book doesn't know either. How perplexing, darned book should have had the answer. DM makes a call and one player is angry. Both players decide to play in other games. In other games the DM (a new one or different one) comes up with a completely different interpretation and the game continues. Now I'm not saying that the DMs are wrong in either case, nor am I saying that they shouldn't come up with answers, NOR am I saying they should be bound by the rules. I AM saying that the rules should be there to give clarification and answers so that the DM doesn't have to come up with things all on their own every single time. (By clarification I mean more info than "Say Yes".)For i) I'm saying that most arguments about reskinning/recolouring/reflavouring seems to assume that the rules just outright allow it. Where as most of these interpretations aren't supported by the actual text given in the actual spell.For ii) Saying things like "4e allows people to make stuff up" seems to give people the impression that 3e (and earlier) editions didn't allow people to make stuff up or have judgement calls.I'm not saying 4e doesn't work differently, I'm saying that aspects of that 4e works differently "because X" are often a little wrong/short sighted.I guess my issue is WHY does the game distinguish? I get that the DnD world isn't our world. But YES I expect it to have similar rules. I never had to consider it an alien world in 3e but suddenly in 4e I am expected to throw all my expectations of how the world works out the window?</blockquote>

Verification