Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tovec" data-source="post: 6002154" data-attributes="member: 95493">I happen to agree in general here, but in practice pemerton's references all seemed to be keyed to player choice over DM fiat. Your solution was opposite.I definitely agree with the lack of issues with 'resource management' games, but then again I know a lot of people who have had issue so I'm not sure where I fall on that aspect.Right, okay but again, what are you proposing as the mechanical difference in this fight between making it a big fight vs a little fight? What happens when that paradigm changes? Who gets to decide? Can it change in the middle of a fight if things start to go south?Okay, this wasn't made clear. So, big fight and little fight are pseudonymous of big detail little detail? Because that isn't what the examples you gave seemed to state: little fights are town guards or couple of goblins and big fights are against boss types (evil wizards and warlords). Big fights have boss immunities and the point is to kill that boss, little fights by definition don't.Generally speaking most 2e stuff didn't work as a straight crossover into 3e, most 3e stuff didn't translate directly into 4e. It seems unlikely 4e to 5e will break this trend, but it is possible. However, even if it is possible to use 4e mechanics in 5e with little or no conversion that still doesn't address the issue of balance which people seem to strive for in 4e which won't exist in 5e. (At least to the same degree.)The first part of this has to do with a misinterpretation of what your system would allow compared to what you are (now) saying. However, I do disagree with the 'cure' part at the end here.Big fights meaning more detail has almost nothing to do with easier or different healing options, nor does less detail. Doubly so if little fights = pre-4e and big fights = 4e style. That is a completely different wing of an argument whether or not clerics should have cure spells left when the fights start has nothing to do with level of detail but it speaks loads to the differences between 4e and pre-4e. Something this system doesn't really emulate.And that is cool. If the idea is all about speeding up boss fights then that is fine. I don't see how this idea does that. You seem to imply completely different mechanics are used for boss fights but that is all.Actually, rather your first post says nothing about new mechanics. Your second (group of) post doesn't raise that either but seems to suggest that big fights would be the default and little fights the subset. Third (group of) posts suggests that big fights are similar to vehicle battle. I'm having a hard time telling which is which.Okay, I'll get behind 5' steps (and the rest) having less impact without a grid. My question is then if I do like 5' steps where do I belong in this grand scheme? Am I a big fights or little fights type gamer? I'm going to ignore for the moment the blended one as I can't really see the defining features of either at the moment. I ask because I honestly can't tell which group I do or am supposed to belong with at the moment. It has changed with every reply.This is my bad but again it goes back to what you had said. Eowyn vs the witch-king should be a boss fight and a 'big fight' therefore, shouldn't it? That is part of what you said. I brought up the throne room guard fight only as a little fight with easy and quick resolution.Overall you seem to be suggesting a system where the big fights are similar to 4e but lacking the length, which should also lack the extra details which make up that length. Then little fights are then the opposite, pre-4e type fights with renewable resources. That is where you lose me. My point is that you say big fights are 4e fights but without certain qualities that make 4e fights what they are - namely the options and length. I don't know how you do that. And I certainly don't know what the non-big fight method is as it should be the one with the extra length and options?Based on what you've said I'm going to modify your original post then.[sblock=modified][/sblock]</blockquote>

Verification