Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Upper_Krust" data-source="post: 235765" data-attributes="member: 326">Hey Nightfall mate! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> (Don't mean to hijack this thread but did you submit to the WotC competition mate?)Hi Colonel Hardisson mate! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I don't think your comments were directed my way specifically, though I will address them anyway.Speaking personally; I understand the concept; have accepted it for nearly 17 years and admire its simplicity.However, they are inherantly flawed (see my previous post) in key areas. You yourself have intimated that many people fail to grasp the concept, even though the mechanic itself is simple.But should we blindly accept them without investigating superior methods!? No, of course not.Its a lot easier to apply verisimilitude (and equally, spot flawed logic) with regards real world concepts - like armour; as opposed to magic systems; classes and saving throws.The difference between an objective argument (as with armour and injury) and a subjective one (as with magic systems; classes and saving throws).While we could be a decade or more away from witnessing 4th Edition; there are certain concepts (like hp; armour; attack skill equated with Hit Dice; and proper strength) I would like to see addressed. After all there would be no point (from a consumer point of view) to release a new edition without changing major elements of contention...that said T$R got away with it in 1986. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />Perhaps some of the above elements will be addressed in forthcoming supplements (D20 Modern handles armour as Damage Reduction), or as variant rules (I wonder has any d20 product so far decided to use a wound system rather than hit points - if so I haven't yet seen it?).</blockquote>

Verification