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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Please step away from the 4th edition "effect everything" abilities.
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="eamon" data-source="post: 5917195" data-attributes="member: 51942"><p>Combat, Exploration, Diplomacy - it doesn't really matter. The campaign will be more fun if you cater to your players.</p><p></p><p>Even if it's purely combat, and <em>even</em> in 4e (which is probably the most easily balanced since as the OP points out there's little variation in what effects what), you'll have PC's that are good against solo's and PC's that are good against hordes of minions. Regardless of your personal opinion of solo's and minions, the PC with his huge bursts will appreciate it if you introduce a horde of minions now and then; whereas the solo executioner will appreciate it if you let him run roughshod over a solo now and then. And irrespective of their strengths, different players want different things from the game, which it's helpful to cater too as well.</p><p></p><p>This is no different whether its combat, exploration or diplomacy: catering to players (or at least <em>con<em>sider<em>ing</em></em></em> them) is part of DM-ing.</p><p></p><p>I don't want a return of 3e's mechanics for favored enemy - I'm not disagreeing with you here. I'm objecting to the tired, unhelpful tip to be fun and engaging. Obviously a game should be fun and engaging; saying it doesn't make it happen. The advice is way too abstract; as is demonstrated by the subsequent advice to not cater to your players. And it certainly isn't an argument to only have "effect everything" abilities.</p><p></p><p>How about damage types with their accompanying resistances/vulnerabilities? Those are an example of rules for effects that are somewhat specific. There's been rumors of a possible revival of weapon-damage types (e.g. bludgeoning vs. slashing etc.), do you think that's a good idea?</p><p></p><p>I think that game rules that encourage adapting your strategy to the task are a good thing; so I think that the general idea of moving away from "effect everything" abilities is good but the OP is looking in the wrong place. I'd much rather see limits to things like expertise (4e), weapon focus (3e/4e), weapon specialization (3e) and magic weapon bonuses so that PC's aren't hyper-specialized to the point that they <em>need</em> to keep using the same tool.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="eamon, post: 5917195, member: 51942"] Combat, Exploration, Diplomacy - it doesn't really matter. The campaign will be more fun if you cater to your players. Even if it's purely combat, and [I]even[/I] in 4e (which is probably the most easily balanced since as the OP points out there's little variation in what effects what), you'll have PC's that are good against solo's and PC's that are good against hordes of minions. Regardless of your personal opinion of solo's and minions, the PC with his huge bursts will appreciate it if you introduce a horde of minions now and then; whereas the solo executioner will appreciate it if you let him run roughshod over a solo now and then. And irrespective of their strengths, different players want different things from the game, which it's helpful to cater too as well. This is no different whether its combat, exploration or diplomacy: catering to players (or at least [I]con[I]sider[I]ing[/I][/I][/I] them) is part of DM-ing. I don't want a return of 3e's mechanics for favored enemy - I'm not disagreeing with you here. I'm objecting to the tired, unhelpful tip to be fun and engaging. Obviously a game should be fun and engaging; saying it doesn't make it happen. The advice is way too abstract; as is demonstrated by the subsequent advice to not cater to your players. And it certainly isn't an argument to only have "effect everything" abilities. How about damage types with their accompanying resistances/vulnerabilities? Those are an example of rules for effects that are somewhat specific. There's been rumors of a possible revival of weapon-damage types (e.g. bludgeoning vs. slashing etc.), do you think that's a good idea? I think that game rules that encourage adapting your strategy to the task are a good thing; so I think that the general idea of moving away from "effect everything" abilities is good but the OP is looking in the wrong place. I'd much rather see limits to things like expertise (4e), weapon focus (3e/4e), weapon specialization (3e) and magic weapon bonuses so that PC's aren't hyper-specialized to the point that they [I]need[/I] to keep using the same tool. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Please step away from the 4th edition "effect everything" abilities.
Top