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
*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
*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
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Misuse of the save mechanics in the MM to reintroduce save or die effects
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="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 4706263" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>If petrification is just going to reverse when the medusa is dead, then why not just call it 'stunned'? In fact a stun could be nastier than that. </p><p></p><p>I think the 4e designers were attempting to both have their cake AND eat it too. They wanted a monster that would be fearsome, so they gave it a watered down version of an instantaneous kill effect, but at the same time they didn't think it was 'fun', so they watered it down. What they ended up with is what you end up with in most such compromises, the worst of both worlds.</p><p></p><p>It is still a total kill effect even if it takes 3 rounds to kill you and only works 25% of the time. OTOH it is clearly a lot less awe inspiring than the old time "if you are hit you die" mechanic. </p><p></p><p>Personally I think the problem is that the 4e designers have lost sight of what the fun in D&D is to a certain extent. They have become so focused on one particular vision of the way to have fun that they've railroaded the game down a specific path that only caters to that one idea of what having fun is. To ME and the players I DM for having fun means really being challenged. Having truly frighteningly powerful monsters and dangers that might well be able to snuff you out in an instant. I'm not saying that is all that is fun in the game or that such monsters should be the norm, but stripping that element out of the game IMHO isn't ADDING to the fun of the game, it is just removing a possible dimension of fun simply because it didn't happen to float their boats.</p><p></p><p>So, be welcome to come play in my world. You get hit by the gaze of the medusa, then baby you're petrified. But you can be very sure if there's a medusa around, everyone knows it! Very few and far between are the parties that dare take on that adventure, and they prepare well, or they join the statue collection. If the players don't like that kind of fun, then I'm not going to ram it down their throats. I guarantee you that even if the player who's character got petrified gets a bit bored waiting for the fight to end so they can introduce a new character, they will remember that fight! In the long run the game will be more fun for all of them, and when they beat those odds they'll remember it a lot more than they remember the 847th Orc they killed.</p><p></p><p>So I have a message for Mr. Mearls and crew. Don't overdo it. You may be playing game designer, but try to be cognizant of the fact that you're way is not the only way, and remember that if you try to homogenize us all into playing only one way, some of us will just play other game systems and you'll lose customers. I like 4e fine and that isn't a criticizm, just an observation.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 4706263, member: 82106"] If petrification is just going to reverse when the medusa is dead, then why not just call it 'stunned'? In fact a stun could be nastier than that. I think the 4e designers were attempting to both have their cake AND eat it too. They wanted a monster that would be fearsome, so they gave it a watered down version of an instantaneous kill effect, but at the same time they didn't think it was 'fun', so they watered it down. What they ended up with is what you end up with in most such compromises, the worst of both worlds. It is still a total kill effect even if it takes 3 rounds to kill you and only works 25% of the time. OTOH it is clearly a lot less awe inspiring than the old time "if you are hit you die" mechanic. Personally I think the problem is that the 4e designers have lost sight of what the fun in D&D is to a certain extent. They have become so focused on one particular vision of the way to have fun that they've railroaded the game down a specific path that only caters to that one idea of what having fun is. To ME and the players I DM for having fun means really being challenged. Having truly frighteningly powerful monsters and dangers that might well be able to snuff you out in an instant. I'm not saying that is all that is fun in the game or that such monsters should be the norm, but stripping that element out of the game IMHO isn't ADDING to the fun of the game, it is just removing a possible dimension of fun simply because it didn't happen to float their boats. So, be welcome to come play in my world. You get hit by the gaze of the medusa, then baby you're petrified. But you can be very sure if there's a medusa around, everyone knows it! Very few and far between are the parties that dare take on that adventure, and they prepare well, or they join the statue collection. If the players don't like that kind of fun, then I'm not going to ram it down their throats. I guarantee you that even if the player who's character got petrified gets a bit bored waiting for the fight to end so they can introduce a new character, they will remember that fight! In the long run the game will be more fun for all of them, and when they beat those odds they'll remember it a lot more than they remember the 847th Orc they killed. So I have a message for Mr. Mearls and crew. Don't overdo it. You may be playing game designer, but try to be cognizant of the fact that you're way is not the only way, and remember that if you try to homogenize us all into playing only one way, some of us will just play other game systems and you'll lose customers. I like 4e fine and that isn't a criticizm, just an observation. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Misuse of the save mechanics in the MM to reintroduce save or die effects
Top