pawsplay's dealbreaker list

pawsplay

Adventurer
Amphimir Míriel said:
And sorry Paws, the boxing analogy does not fly... And as much as it looks cool, wielding two long (and heavy) weapons is not better than wielding a long weapon and a shorter one in your off hand.

That's not what I said. I said two longswords was better than one longsword. I prefer a shortsword as my second weapon, but I'll take anything over nothing at all. I spent several years working on a single sword style, and believe me, there's a lot you can do with that. I can probably take an average two weapon fighter with a single weapon most of the time. But could I take a good two-weapon fighter? Forget about it.

And can you use two longswords? I can and I have. I don't prefer it, but I know people who do.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

pawsplay

Adventurer
amethal said:
The frost giant was left out so MM1 would feel incomplete, and to legitimise MM2.This annoys me.

I've been playing D&D for about 24 years, and this MM will be the first one without a frost giant in it.
 


Plane Sailing

Astral Admin - Mwahahaha!
Pistonrager said:
Ok... I read the first post and that's enough...

OP.... good riddance... seriously... leave. If fourth edition isn't for you don't complain just don't buy it... and get off the 4E board.

Go. Seriously.

This isn't flaming or baiting, it's the truth, complain elsewhere.

If you had concerns you might be consolable but "dealbreakers" if that's really the case, leave, you're beyond help.

Considering my warning on page 1 and Umbrans warning on page 6, and the utterly stupid nature of this post, you're suspended for 7 days. I really don't know what you were thinking.

Claiming something is 'teh troof' doesn't give you carte blanch to be offensive to other people.

You may email me if (for some strange reason) you don't understand why you've been Suspended.
 

FadedC

First Post
MaelStorm said:
Yep, I'm on the same page too. I hate incompleteness. That's also why I hate to wait until PHB II to get the Druid, Sorcerer, Barbarian, Shaman and Bard classes. This is also why I hate Mini boosters too, if you want 20 minions you have to buy 45 boosters, or buy them individually at a bigger price, or use crappy tools.

Aside the incompleteness, which utterly annoys me, I find the game mechanic of 4E is wonderful and I'm happy they did what they did.

Well I can understand the missing classes even if it annoys me. It's not like 3e anymore where non spellcasting classes only need 2-3 pages, and spellcasting classes share powers with each other. Classes are far more complicated now and it's understandable that they not try to balance/present too many at once in the first book.

The frost giant though.....yeah that seems like a bad decision. In practice when I start playing I really wont care, but the frost giant seems like such an iconic monster it just seems wierd not to have him. The delver on the other hand.....
 

mmadsen

First Post
amethal said:
The metallic dragons (and some good aligned fey, I believe) were left out because the designers thought the space could be more usefully taken up by "monsters". I disagree, because I like having pre made stats for a wide variety of creatures for "world building" purposes, but I can see where they are coming from.
I think it's valid to leave out combat stats for creatures you're not likely to fight in favor of including stats for creatures you are likely to fight, but it does give the odd impression that many good-aligned creatures don't exist.
amethal said:
The frost giant was left out so MM1 would feel incomplete, and to legitimise MM2.This annoys me. (And for what its worth, in 3rd edition I have MM1 to 4, and Fiend Folio but I know a fair number of people who only have the three core books.)
I think frost giants are far too iconic to leave out. The game needs hill giants, frost giants, and fire giants.
 

AllisterH

First Post
mmadsen said:
I think it's valid to leave out combat stats for creatures you're not likely to fight in favor of including stats for creatures you are likely to fight, but it does give the odd impression that many good-aligned creatures don't exist.
I think frost giants are far too iconic to leave out. The game needs hill giants, frost giants, and fire giants.

Oh yeah, the MM will really be incomplete since it only has Hill, Fire, Storm and Cloud giants...that one missing giant entry really makes it feel like you can't run a proper giant encounter.

Come on, the only difference in the 30 years of D&D between a Frost giant and the others is it is a reverse Fire giant...
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
I'm sorry pawsplay won't be switching, since I've enjoyed some of his posts in the rules forum here. Like, for example, his rules interpretation philosophy. And, that will obviously be missing now, with 4e rules discussions that are to come (as 3.5e discussion slowly withers away, like 2e rules discussion did, and like 3.0 rules discussion did).

So, that's a shame.
 
Last edited:

mmadsen

First Post
pawsplay said:
1 hp minions. The concept works in some games, but in D&D, it does not, because hit points already measure minionness.
If we look to fiction, most opponents should go down with one or two hits. One hit point seems extreme though, I agree, especially when other characters have dozens.
pawsplay said:
No second attacks with a second weapon unless you take a power. This is a 1e-ism I can live without. It bothered me then, it bothers me now.
Seriously? I've never considered the number of weapons in my hands the limiting factor in how many times I could hit someone.
pawsplay said:
The removal of monsters from the MM that have been there since the beginning and will likely be a part of 4e. While I can guess you intend for me to become a sourcebook junkie, it's considered a little crass to flat-out tell someone they will be buying a new MM every year or so just to keep up. Next time? There won't be no next time, for that was th' last time...
There are very, very few monsters that I feel nees to be in the Monster Manual, and I completely agree with the 4E philosophy of providing different kinds of orcs, goblins, etc.

That said, I would put the frost giant on the list of iconic monsters that belong in the Monster Manual.
pawsplay said:
Wizards as infinite energy machines. I just can't abide wizards zotting all day long. What's wrong with using a crossbow now and then like an honest person?
I completely agree with your distaste for free magic -- but I'm not exactly a fan of wizards with crossbows.
pawsplay said:
No gnome illusionists. Gnomes are barely there, as monsters, and forget about illusionists. I started on Basic D&D; gnome illusionists were something I felt AD&D got you that I thought was valuable.
Seriously? A lack of gnome illusionists is a deal-breaker?
pawsplay said:
No penalties. Yeah, right. If you don't get the same bonus someone else does, that's a penalty. Call it what you will. It's just a penalty that goes to 11.
Everyone's above average! Yay! Yeah, I agree; it's silly.
pawsplay said:
Common PC races that teleport very often. Yuck.
I agree, rampant teleportation is way over the top.
pawsplay said:
Too much ZOWIE. I don't need every dungeon crawl to turn into Kill Bill meets Sailor Moon.
Yes, there does seem to be too much...zowie.
pawsplay said:
The end of D&D's participation in open gaming. They had the chance, they blew it. And for what?
Obviously openness didn't benefit WotC as much as it might've.
 

mmadsen

First Post
AllisterH said:
Oh yeah, the MM will really be incomplete since it only has Hill, Fire, Storm and Cloud giants...that one missing giant entry really makes it feel like you can't run a proper giant encounter.
The point is that frost giants are iconic; storm and cloud giants aren't. The complaint isn't about the volume of giants available.
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top