Revisionist game publishing

[ExploderWizard]

Excluding or including "content" (even based on sources) those are easy and can be maintained and saved... or loaded for new characters. (this is different than changing the nature of content.

I agree not all changes are "enhancements"

I am annoyed by having to hunt through the whole bloody list of illegal feats to find the few that I house ruled to be legal for my campaign for instance on characters who have the Reapers touch feat who are not shadarkai.

Does that mean I cant do it? no but it means I have to go out of my way a little it makes the tool a little less useful and the more divergent I get from the "norm" and over time the tool gets less useful.... Unless over time they also change the tool to be better at adapting to house rules and customizations. Which I dont think they have succeeded on (yet).

Yeah. The subscription model without super customization support would eliminate the only real advantage that tabletop RPG's have over computer games. The traditional RPG doesn't have the cool graphics, and the nature of the material provides less of an instantaneous gratification fix than consumers generally want these days. The ability to customize and get exactly what you want for your play group is the greatest strength of the product.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Yeah. The subscription model without super customization support would eliminate the only real advantage that tabletop RPG's have over computer games.

It doesn't eliminate it. You are still able to create a game world however you see fit. You just lose your ability to easily house rule.

Of course I would not mind more or better house rule features in the Character Builder. I want to build my own powers, feats and paragon pathes, classes. (In that order).

 

[Garthanos]

It doesn't eliminate it. You are still able to create a game world however you see fit. You just lose your ability to easily house rule.

Right it isnt black and white...

Of course I would not mind more or better house rule features in the Character Builder. I want to build my own powers, feats and paragon pathes, classes. (In that order).

In fact you can do your own of most of those (they just need improved).

What I want is more ability to rename and reskin while maintaining the same hardware (mechanics on the backside).

I can do it with items.. why not powers?

 

[Scribble]

Having color sight isn't an intrinsic part of being human. It isn't essential to human-ness, and doesn't have a significant impact on survival in a typical human environment.

Being blind in the dark without some compensatory senses when the rest of your race is perfectly at home in the dark IS a significant barrier to survival- the kind of distinction that would, in the RW, denote either a significant mutation if not a separate species or subspecies.

IOW, kobolds without darkvision would likely either be "Surface Kobolds," and have a lifestyle completely different from their subterranean, darkvision-equipped cousins, or be outcasts who were abandoned at cave mouths due to their being severely incapacitated in the warrens- useless mouths to feed, if you will, that the tribe cannot afford to support- and thus the possible first members of what would become "Surface Kobolds."

That's fine. I also know a guy who is completely blind; so he's no longer human? I think he might find that amusing- Or more likely insulting.

The point really is that genetic differences don't automatically = a new race. Sure you can use this as the back story to a new race if you want, I won't argue that it's your game do whatever you find cool... A race of surface Kobolds might be fun to explore actually, but arguing that Kobold PCs not having darkvision automatically makes them an new race based on science??? That's just, well, piss poor science.

But as others said it's probably that whole simulationist vrs not simulationist thing. I'm far from what people say a simulationist is. In fact I'm pretty anti simulationism. For me the stats don't define what an element of the game "is." They only answer whether or not it can do something at any given moment, and how that particular manifestation of a game element reacts with others.

So for me, taking a away darkvision doesn't change the essence of what a Kobold is. It's still a little scaly dog lizard thing that may or may not yell "Bree-Yark...

 

[pawsplay]

So for me, taking a away darkvision doesn't change the essence of what a Kobold is. It's still a little scaly dog lizard thing that may or may not yell "Bree-Yark...

... and bumps into the walls in a kobold warren? I agree that darkvision isn't intrinsic to the concept of kobolds in general, but if it's a characteristic of kobolds in a given game world, it's hard to understand how a PC can lack it without having some kind of disability.

 

[Garthanos]

... and bumps into the walls in a kobold warren? I agree that darkvision isn't intrinsic to the concept of kobolds in general, but if it's a characteristic of kobolds in a given game world, it's hard to understand how a PC can lack it without having some kind of disability.

Not being a worshipper of an evil god who has put there soul into the care of that evil... could be seen as a disability with repercussions by the kobolds.

 

[pawsplay]

Not being a worshipper of an evil god who has put there soul into the care of that evil... could be seen as a disability with repercussions by the kobolds.

What has that got to do with anything?

 

[Garthanos]

What has that got to do with anything?

Why one of the repercussions of not being a "real" kobold is just as you reject it you are rejected by the goddess of the dark and you dont have darkvision.

 

[Obryn]

I believe you are wrong there. In the MM, the basic medium-sized minotaur warrior may have a basic battleaxe for his size, but the medium cabalist has a great mace that does the same damage as a large-sized mace. The large savage minotaur has a greataxe that does the same base damage as a huge-sized greataxe. So, not using oversized weapons? I think use of oversized weapons is exactly where the designers got the base weapon damage from.

Monster damage isn't based on the specific weapon the monster is using. Monster-building in 4e is results-driven, rather than process-driven... The monster's role and level determine its HPs, attacks, defenses, and damage, rather than the other way around. Again, it's a complete departure from simulationism that you will either like or dislike.

A PC minotaur can certainly pick up any weapon that an NPC minotaur uses. They're not even oversized in their stat blocks. This is a tempest in a teapot.

I mean, is it unreasonable to hope that someone arguing about a game's rules should have at least a little idea what the rules actually are? I mean, the two bones of contention are (1) a mistaken idea that a PC minotaur can't use the weapons dropped by an NPC minotaur, and (2) speculation that kobolds (if they receive a full racial writeup) won't have darkvision, despite plenty of evidence to the contrary.

-O

 

[ExploderWizard]

So for me, taking a away darkvision doesn't change the essence of what a Kobold is. It's still a little scaly dog lizard thing that may or may not yell "Bree-Yark...

A kobold yelling Bree-Yark would be something of a rarity for his kind. It would mean that he had been raised by goblins, or was a student of thier language (quite an accomplishment for the typical kobold).