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
*TTRPGs General
Players choose what their PCs do . . .
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="pemerton" data-source="post: 7639092" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>What does <em>wrong</em> mean here?</p><p></p><p>These are all examples of not knowing 4e or how its system works.</p><p></p><p>In 4e the AC of a (say) 16th level ogre will be higher than that of an 8th level ogre (eg AC 28 for the Ogre Bludgeoneer 16th level minion compared to AC 19 for the Ogre Savage 8th level standard). AC in 4e doesn't reflect simply the armour that is worn (hide armour in both cases). It is a mechanical device for adjudicating the success of attack rolls that reflects the overall fictional context. Statting an ogre as a higher level minion rather than a lower-level standard involves stepping up the AC to the appropriate level, while stepping down the hit points. This change in the mathematical operations performed during resolution don't change the fiction.</p><p></p><p>In 4e there are no fumble rules. A GM is free to narrate a missed attack by an ogre minion as a fumbled swing. S/he is even free to narrate it as inflicting a pin-prick's worth of physical harm to another ogre minion in the vicinity. In 4e that narration would be mere colour and is not reflected in the resolution process (similar to the way in which, in AD&D, narrating a missed attack as glancing of armour is mere colour - contrast, say, Burning Wheel where that is not mere colour and has mechanical significance and is a permitted narration only when the mechanics provide for it).</p><p></p><p>In 4e a higher level mage casts a more powerful magic missile spell. (Whether this is narrated as a single more powerful missile or a series of magical blasts pulse-laser style is a matter of discretion for the player of the wizard.) This is the same as the ability of a higher level fighter to strike more powerful blows, or fire more deadly shots with a bow or crossbow. There is no such thing in 4e as a mid-paragon mage casting the same magic missile spell with the same in-fiction power as a mid-heroic mage; or as a mid-paragon archer releasing an arrow with no greater deadliness of aim and power than a mid-heroic archer.</p><p></p><p>In 4e there is no "spell research" of the sort you describe - ie mechanics-first spell descriptions intended to exploit weak points in the rules. There are plenty of magical effects in 4e that can do AoE damage and will clear a field of minion ogres - this is because the magic of those mid-paragon wizards, sorcerers and invokers is more powerful than that of their mid-heroic precursors.</p><p></p><p>You are presenting a certain mechanical framework - AD&D - as if (i) it is a fictional framework and (ii) it is the only possible ficitonal framework. Frankly this is bizarre. There's nothing <em>inconsistent</em>, for instance, in a ficiton in which a more puissant archer can shoot down a fell beast with a single arrow (qv Legolas in LotR). The fact that AD&D doesn't allow for it simply reminds us of one of the oddities of AD&D, namely, it's relatively unrealistic treatment of archery.</p><p></p><p>Why?</p><p></p><p>Why?</p><p></p><p>What is the inconsistency in the fiction in which a ghoul which is a handy challenge for a mid-heroic PC is little challenge to a mid-paragon PC?</p><p></p><p>The maths of this are, for present purposes which is at the level of generalities, no different from minion rules. I can even make the point by rephrasing what you have said: a reduced chance to hit but significantly increased chance to kill as level advances is a nice reflection of - in the fiction - the character's skill increasing.</p><p></p><p>This is not a <em>theory</em>. It's a property that any given D&D variant either possesses or doesn't. Clearly 4e doesn't possess this property. The making of an attack roll doesn't per se tell us whether or not physical harm is inflicted on the foe; nor does it tell us whether or not damage in the mechaincal sense (ie depletion of hp) occurs as part of the resolution procedure.</p><p></p><p>This can easily be seen in the fact that 4e allows for hit point depletion on a failed attack roll; and allows for hit point depletion to be narrated as other than physical harm in the fiction; and clearly permits a failed attack roll against a minion to be narrated as the non-fatal infliction of physical harm.</p><p></p><p>Were it relevant, which I don't think it is, 4e D&D is not a resource management game in the way that AD&D is.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7639092, member: 42582"] What does [I]wrong[/I] mean here? These are all examples of not knowing 4e or how its system works. In 4e the AC of a (say) 16th level ogre will be higher than that of an 8th level ogre (eg AC 28 for the Ogre Bludgeoneer 16th level minion compared to AC 19 for the Ogre Savage 8th level standard). AC in 4e doesn't reflect simply the armour that is worn (hide armour in both cases). It is a mechanical device for adjudicating the success of attack rolls that reflects the overall fictional context. Statting an ogre as a higher level minion rather than a lower-level standard involves stepping up the AC to the appropriate level, while stepping down the hit points. This change in the mathematical operations performed during resolution don't change the fiction. In 4e there are no fumble rules. A GM is free to narrate a missed attack by an ogre minion as a fumbled swing. S/he is even free to narrate it as inflicting a pin-prick's worth of physical harm to another ogre minion in the vicinity. In 4e that narration would be mere colour and is not reflected in the resolution process (similar to the way in which, in AD&D, narrating a missed attack as glancing of armour is mere colour - contrast, say, Burning Wheel where that is not mere colour and has mechanical significance and is a permitted narration only when the mechanics provide for it). In 4e a higher level mage casts a more powerful magic missile spell. (Whether this is narrated as a single more powerful missile or a series of magical blasts pulse-laser style is a matter of discretion for the player of the wizard.) This is the same as the ability of a higher level fighter to strike more powerful blows, or fire more deadly shots with a bow or crossbow. There is no such thing in 4e as a mid-paragon mage casting the same magic missile spell with the same in-fiction power as a mid-heroic mage; or as a mid-paragon archer releasing an arrow with no greater deadliness of aim and power than a mid-heroic archer. In 4e there is no "spell research" of the sort you describe - ie mechanics-first spell descriptions intended to exploit weak points in the rules. There are plenty of magical effects in 4e that can do AoE damage and will clear a field of minion ogres - this is because the magic of those mid-paragon wizards, sorcerers and invokers is more powerful than that of their mid-heroic precursors. You are presenting a certain mechanical framework - AD&D - as if (i) it is a fictional framework and (ii) it is the only possible ficitonal framework. Frankly this is bizarre. There's nothing [I]inconsistent[/I], for instance, in a ficiton in which a more puissant archer can shoot down a fell beast with a single arrow (qv Legolas in LotR). The fact that AD&D doesn't allow for it simply reminds us of one of the oddities of AD&D, namely, it's relatively unrealistic treatment of archery. Why? Why? What is the inconsistency in the fiction in which a ghoul which is a handy challenge for a mid-heroic PC is little challenge to a mid-paragon PC? The maths of this are, for present purposes which is at the level of generalities, no different from minion rules. I can even make the point by rephrasing what you have said: a reduced chance to hit but significantly increased chance to kill as level advances is a nice reflection of - in the fiction - the character's skill increasing. This is not a [I]theory[/I]. It's a property that any given D&D variant either possesses or doesn't. Clearly 4e doesn't possess this property. The making of an attack roll doesn't per se tell us whether or not physical harm is inflicted on the foe; nor does it tell us whether or not damage in the mechaincal sense (ie depletion of hp) occurs as part of the resolution procedure. This can easily be seen in the fact that 4e allows for hit point depletion on a failed attack roll; and allows for hit point depletion to be narrated as other than physical harm in the fiction; and clearly permits a failed attack roll against a minion to be narrated as the non-fatal infliction of physical harm. Were it relevant, which I don't think it is, 4e D&D is not a resource management game in the way that AD&D is. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Players choose what their PCs do . . .
Top