Revisionist game publishing

[catsclaw227]

Yes, yes it is. It's one (small) reason I haven't played 4E: the concept that two creatures have a difference -- especially a biological difference like size or darkvision -- based on whether or not they are a PC is a game-breaking problem for me.

I feel the need to ask as well.... How is darkvision biological? Is this something stated somewhere that I missed?

We assume it is because in the Real World, vision is part of one of our biological senses.

But darkvision has no Real World equivalent, being perfectly clear grayscale vision in total darkness (up to a specific distance, like a torch). If it was biological, wouldn't it extend to the natural vision range of the creature? Wouldn't it be more like infravision?

Since this is one of the things that turned you off of 4e, what other examples (like darkvision) do you have for monsters having different attributes than their PC equivalent (I am not talking about MM NPC options -- these are NOT supposed to be PC writeups).

Maybe this particular issue is one that doesn't actually exist?

 

[rjdafoe]

Yes, yes it is. It's one (small) reason I haven't played 4E: the concept that two creatures have a difference -- especially a biological difference like size or darkvision -- based on whether or not they are a PC is a game-breaking problem for me.

Could you point out in the books, where this happens on a regular basis?

We are talking hypethetical - it hasn't happened as the race has not been written up for a PC yet.

And biological abnormalities happen all the time in various species and could even be attributed to outside influences and have a higher percentage change of happening in a given area....

 

[pawsplay]

Seems obvious to me.

If a racial writeup (or class or item or power or whatever) rattles someones sense of what is "right", it seems that the complaint is only about something that would nerf the PC and never something that would aid or provide a bonus.

Seems obvious to me.

That would explain why I am having trouble seeing the relationship between that statement and this conversation. We are not talking about nerfs or bonuses. We are talking about a character having a typical racial trait versus not. Darkvision is not a "plus to." Kobolds lacking darkvision would be like an elf without pointed ears.

 

[catsclaw227]

That would explain why I am having trouble seeing the relationship between that statement and this conversation. We are not talking about nerfs or bonuses. We are talking about a character having a typical racial trait versus not. Darkvision is not a "plus to." Kobolds lacking darkvision would be like an elf without pointed ears.

But where is it said kobold PCs WON'T have darkvision? There hasn't been a kobold PC writeup yet!

This is like getting all puffed up because I think that my wife will get me the wrong something for my birthday next year, even though I haven't even talked to her about it and I haven't even defined what that something will be in the first place.

And, IMHO, darkvision is most definitely a "plus to". Why else would it cost a feat to get in another way? Seeing in the dark? Sounds like a plus to me.

 

[pawsplay]

But where is it said kobold PCs WON'T have darkvision? There hasn't been a kobold PC writeup yet!

This is like getting all puffed up because I think that my wife will get me the wrong something for my birthday next year, even though I haven't even talked to her about it and I haven't even defined what that something will be in the first place.

Who's puffed up?

And, IMHO, darkvision is most definitely a "plus to". Why else would it cost a feat to get in another way? Seeing in the dark? Sounds like a plus to me.

Darkvision is not being brought up because it's useful, but because kobolds have it and NPC kobolds do not. "I want darkvision" is a completely separate discussion, and as has been pointed out, PCs can certainly get darkvision if they want it.

The implication, now a stated premise, that people are upset about darkvision because it's the loss of an ability for PCs, even though no current PC writeup is under discussion, does not make a lot of sense to me. On the subject of kobolds, the issue is that the monster and the NPC do not seem to describe the same creature (the assumption being that they all live in kobold communities). On the subject of minotaurs, the issue seems to be a total lack of cohesion, as if PC minotaurs, NPC minotaurs, and monster minotaurs might or might not be the same kind of creatures, and it's all very hard to tell what was intended. I tend to assume that the PC versions and monster versions of a race have some relationship, but I could be wrong.

I'm not feeling oppressed... I don't play kobolds and I don't play 4e. I'm criticizing the writeups because, in my view, they are not very good or useful.

 

[Hussar]

Yes, yes it is. It's one (small) reason I haven't played 4E: the concept that two creatures have a difference -- especially a biological difference like size or darkvision -- based on whether or not they are a PC is a game-breaking problem for me.

As was mentioned, how is darkvision biological? It certainly doesn't exist in nature, unlike pointed ears or a tail. Why not say that kobolds who live with their tribes are granted darkvision as a dark blessing from their diety?

Up until recently, it was a common thing for us to have game settings lasting five, seven, ten years. Over that period of time, you can bet that more than one person wants to play Race x.

Fair enough. However, do you think the game should cater to you or not? Do you think that game settings, and groups for that matter, lasting that long are the norm or a rarity?

If something comes up five times in TEN YEARS, I still don't think that rules need to be specific to that in any case.

But this inspires a Thread of its own

 

[Drkfathr1]

As far as Darkvision not being biological, but being a magical gift or trait...

Wouldn't it then be dispellable with Dispel Magic?

 

[smetzger]

eh, I thought all this was known up front when you played 4e.
4e's premise for monsters is that they follow different rules than PCs and WOTC and the DM can just make up stuff for monsters withouth being saddled with the same rules that PCs have.

So, yeah your Minotaur, kobold whatever that you play is gonna be different from the one that is encountered and even follow different rules.
This even applies for humans, DM can make a human Large sized or give it Darkvision if he wants and not do the same for the PCs.

IMO this is the drawback of being able to handwave monster creation. You have to deal with the "Why can't my kobold PC have darkvision?" "Why isn't my Minotaur Large like the others?"
"Why can't I learn/use X special power?"
"Hey, thats cheating we could never be able to do that?"

This is one of the things I don't like about 4e, 2e, and 1e and even some monsters in 3e (is it bullywugs that have the sticky shields, and are flind bars in 3e???).

If your gonna play 4e, you need to recognize and accept this up front.

 

[MrMyth]

As was mentioned, how is darkvision biological? It certainly doesn't exist in nature, unlike pointed ears or a tail. Why not say that kobolds who live with their tribes are granted darkvision as a dark blessing from their diety?

I really hate to come to the defense of those dragging out the nonsensical complaints in this thread, and yet...

Yes, darkvision doesn't have to be biological. It also doesn't have to be fantastic. While I encourage DMs to use their imagination to resolve differences like this, DMs are perfectly entitled to have a setting where such elements are biological, and not feel forced into changing that background to resolve a contradictory mechanic.

(In which case I'd recommend giving PC kobolds darkvision if it is really a big deal. Since that is pretty much certainly what will happen when they get a PC write-up. Since this entire debate is an exercise in hypothetical situations that have never actually come up in actual gaming, used to provide people more reasons to lobby unreasonable complaints against 4E. Sigh.)

 

[ExploderWizard]

The fact that there's a feat that allows you to gain dark vision (a couple different ones actually) in my opinion sort of negates the whole argument.

I agree. There is also a feat that allows you to change your race, and being a feat, you can retrain it later.

Darkvision is trivial to compared to that level of silliness.