Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Mearls' "Stop, Thief!" Article
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="D'karr" data-source="post: 5566335" data-attributes="member: 336"><p>Just to clarify I didn't call it a flaw, and I don't see it as a flaw. Page 42 of the DMG and pages 101-109 of the DMB are both part of the <em>standard</em> rules.</p><p></p><p>The problem I described is not that the design is bad either. As I mentioned I believe that the basic rules of 4e are very good exactly because they are well designed.</p><p></p><p>The problem I describe is when players self-restrict to a subset of the <em>standard</em> rules and completely obviate others that can be applicable and open up more avenues for them. If a player restricts himself to only performing move actions on his turn, and never used standard, minor or immediate actions he would be missing a plethora of possibilities. When players limit themselves only to the things written on their character sheet they fall into the same trap. A D&D character is only limited by the imagination/creativity of the player. The page 42 rules are part of the rules design exactly to allow that imagination/creativity to be used, and still remain within the balance of that design. They open up entire highways of actions that cannot simply be described in the Powers Mechanic.</p><p></p><p>The designers of 4e wanted to have more options/action within the design space and they provided a very good way to do more. What they did not provide was an easy to remember way to "know you can" do more. I just added one thing that allows players to know they can do more.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="D'karr, post: 5566335, member: 336"] Just to clarify I didn't call it a flaw, and I don't see it as a flaw. Page 42 of the DMG and pages 101-109 of the DMB are both part of the [I]standard[/I] rules. The problem I described is not that the design is bad either. As I mentioned I believe that the basic rules of 4e are very good exactly because they are well designed. The problem I describe is when players self-restrict to a subset of the [i]standard[/i] rules and completely obviate others that can be applicable and open up more avenues for them. If a player restricts himself to only performing move actions on his turn, and never used standard, minor or immediate actions he would be missing a plethora of possibilities. When players limit themselves only to the things written on their character sheet they fall into the same trap. A D&D character is only limited by the imagination/creativity of the player. The page 42 rules are part of the rules design exactly to allow that imagination/creativity to be used, and still remain within the balance of that design. They open up entire highways of actions that cannot simply be described in the Powers Mechanic. The designers of 4e wanted to have more options/action within the design space and they provided a very good way to do more. What they did not provide was an easy to remember way to "know you can" do more. I just added one thing that allows players to know they can do more. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Mearls' "Stop, Thief!" Article
Top