Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5765479" data-attributes="member: 54877">It can just as easily go the other way, too.&nbsp; The base 3E rules, with the right character, make a lance user versus a slow monster total nonsense compared to what other characters can do.&nbsp; (This is not theoretical.&nbsp; It is a problem we had in our campaign.)&nbsp;&nbsp; 3.5 handled this by explicitly toning down some of the options so that a lance charge no longer followed the process logic of how lances, charges, and mounted combat worked, but to provide results more consistent with what people expected of such a charge.&nbsp; (I forget the exact changes as it has been awhile.)&nbsp;But you'll note that you can have the same problems with the other options.&nbsp; If you bake in &quot;cinematic&quot; results too tightly, you'll frustrate people that want more grit--or vice versa.&nbsp; If you bake in such results with metagaming constructs to smooth out the rough edges, you'll get the complaints we here about 4E all the time (in some place or another), because to do so is to ignore process almost entirely.&nbsp; &nbsp;This is why my preference for a &quot;central&quot; D&amp;D is mainly results-based, about halfway between grit and gonzo, with dials to transparently move those results either way.&nbsp; Then tack on filters to make it easier to add/exclude elements that just are not going to work with your preferences (i.e. bull rushes that don't work at all, Come and Get It)--don't even pretend that everything is going to work for every preference.&nbsp; Then intersect the whole things with several metagaming constructs that are optional, and individually so.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5765479, member: 54877"] It can just as easily go the other way, too. The base 3E rules, with the right character, make a lance user versus a slow monster total nonsense compared to what other characters can do. (This is not theoretical. It is a problem we had in our campaign.) 3.5 handled this by explicitly toning down some of the options so that a lance charge no longer followed the process logic of how lances, charges, and mounted combat worked, but to provide results more consistent with what people expected of such a charge. (I forget the exact changes as it has been awhile.) But you'll note that you can have the same problems with the other options. If you bake in "cinematic" results too tightly, you'll frustrate people that want more grit--or vice versa. If you bake in such results with metagaming constructs to smooth out the rough edges, you'll get the complaints we here about 4E all the time (in some place or another), because to do so is to ignore process almost entirely. This is why my preference for a "central" D&D is mainly results-based, about halfway between grit and gonzo, with dials to transparently move those results either way. Then tack on filters to make it easier to add/exclude elements that just are not going to work with your preferences (i.e. bull rushes that don't work at all, Come and Get It)--don't even pretend that everything is going to work for every preference. Then intersect the whole things with several metagaming constructs that are optional, and individually so. [/QUOTE]

Verification