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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5761142" data-attributes="member: 42582">Yes. Which in some ways takes us back to Vicious Mockery - weakening a slime by mocking Juiblex becomes just as effective a way to destroy it as setting a torch to it.In my view, it is this feature of 4e which makes it not very suitable for classic Gygaxian or Pulsepherian play, in which the players' selection of means is meant to make a big difference to their PCs' prospects of success. At first, I thought this made 4e unsuitable for gamist play altogether (unless you make the sorts of changes that [MENTION=386]LostSoul[/MENTION] has done), but [MENTION=27160]Balesir[/MENTION] explained to me a variety of "light gamism" to which 4e is well suited, namely, succeeding in combat via "cool and/or clever moves". For this sort of gamism, it is probably less important to differentiate between the damage done by different moves, and more important that the GM seed an encounter with opportunities for the players to have their PCs do interesting things.I assume by "better" here you mean better in the Gygaxian sense, rather than (for example) more innovative or more entertaining.Likewise. For me, this is an important difference between 4e and games like HeroWars/Quest and Maelstrom Storytelling.But in principle what you (Mark CMG) suggest is feasible, I think, if there were guidelines to balance conditions against damage.I think there is a lot of scope for WotC to develop this, via examples in adventures, published guidelines, etc.</blockquote>

Verification