Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Mike Mearls on how D&D 4E could have looked
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="BryonD" data-source="post: 7765323" data-attributes="member: 957"><p>Completely irrelevant. If the rogue had been trying to swing from the exact same chandelier at a L25 fighter half-demon ogre, the relevant portion of the example would not have changed. </p><p>The example gives three parts:</p><p>1) Swinging from the chandelier. The character level all the matters. The example makes it completely clear that DM is to reference the character's level on the sacred chart.</p><p>2) Actually kicking and shoving the Ogre. The Ogre's fort is the DC here. Thumbs Up. </p><p>3) Dealing damage, which again is based completely on the level of the character and has nothing to do with (a) the ogre or (b) the brazier. I suppose the brazier provides the type "fire", but the exact same brazier would inflict substantially more damage had the creature been tougher than the ogre, despite it being the exact same brazier. (at least if with roll with your example that an 28th level character wouldn't be fighting an ogre).</p><p></p><p>But, the only one of these three items relevant to wooden doors is part (1). The DC to successfully swing from the chandelier is set by the level of the character. *IF* they had left out the Fort DC of the ogre in step (2) then your counter might be valid. But they have clearly established that the ogre's fiction is captured there. Part (1) has *NOTHING* to do with the ogre. </p><p></p><p>OK, and we have discussed before that I want mechanics that obey the fiction and you want fiction that obeys the mechanics. I accept that this is fun to you.</p><p></p><p>The point is not that either of us is doing "badwrongfun". The market spoke a long time ago and here in 2018 we are simply discussing the 4e that might have been. </p><p>Your justifications for why this approach is great for your game is meaningless to the conversation about why 4E missed the mark with so very many people.</p><p></p><p>And, just to be clear, the idea that a book is going to tell me that burned out shacks should have excellent doors because of the level of the characters is both boggling and repulsive to me. I don't think my opinion has the slightest merit when it comes to what you do at your table. But, that simply sounds like a terrible experience.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BryonD, post: 7765323, member: 957"] Completely irrelevant. If the rogue had been trying to swing from the exact same chandelier at a L25 fighter half-demon ogre, the relevant portion of the example would not have changed. The example gives three parts: 1) Swinging from the chandelier. The character level all the matters. The example makes it completely clear that DM is to reference the character's level on the sacred chart. 2) Actually kicking and shoving the Ogre. The Ogre's fort is the DC here. Thumbs Up. 3) Dealing damage, which again is based completely on the level of the character and has nothing to do with (a) the ogre or (b) the brazier. I suppose the brazier provides the type "fire", but the exact same brazier would inflict substantially more damage had the creature been tougher than the ogre, despite it being the exact same brazier. (at least if with roll with your example that an 28th level character wouldn't be fighting an ogre). But, the only one of these three items relevant to wooden doors is part (1). The DC to successfully swing from the chandelier is set by the level of the character. *IF* they had left out the Fort DC of the ogre in step (2) then your counter might be valid. But they have clearly established that the ogre's fiction is captured there. Part (1) has *NOTHING* to do with the ogre. OK, and we have discussed before that I want mechanics that obey the fiction and you want fiction that obeys the mechanics. I accept that this is fun to you. The point is not that either of us is doing "badwrongfun". The market spoke a long time ago and here in 2018 we are simply discussing the 4e that might have been. Your justifications for why this approach is great for your game is meaningless to the conversation about why 4E missed the mark with so very many people. And, just to be clear, the idea that a book is going to tell me that burned out shacks should have excellent doors because of the level of the characters is both boggling and repulsive to me. I don't think my opinion has the slightest merit when it comes to what you do at your table. But, that simply sounds like a terrible experience. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Mike Mearls on how D&D 4E could have looked
Top