Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 5279316" data-attributes="member: 957">It has amused me from time to time that the Gorgon monster is unrelated to Gorgons.But that is not the problem.&nbsp; Ultimately the gorgon is just a monster that happens to have that name.&nbsp; Clearly the pertification theme is borrowed over, but it is still a completely different monster.&nbsp; Not everyone named Hank is a home run hitting hall of famer.Really, if you want an example of &quot;wrongness&quot; that I accept, the fact that &quot;medusa&quot; is a race in D&amp;D would be much better.Medusa in 4E is supposed to be Medusa and it is wrong.You could easily play 4E with the house-rule that if you fail a single save against her gaze you instantly turn to stone.&nbsp; You could re-introduce SoD throughout 4E.But the debate at hand isn't 4E itself, but the attitude on SoD, and clearly the design idea behind 4E supports anti-SoD.You could have a monster in 3E called the Medufa, or any other name you wanted.&nbsp; And give it all the exact abilities of the 4E monster called &quot;Medusa&quot;.&nbsp; There is nothing wrong with that.&nbsp; Slow/para/stone is not an &quot;unfun&quot; mechanic.&nbsp; And if in your game, in any system, you have a 4e style &quot;medusa&quot; creature as a companion to a SoD Medusa, then my position is immediately resolved.&nbsp; The creature itself is fine.&nbsp; It is claiming it is &quot;medusa&quot; that fails.That said, I'm also a fan of SoD in general.&nbsp; I like Finger of Death.&nbsp; I like having adventurers who live in a seriously dangerous world and the potential for instant death may be around any corner.That is a separate point from : You can't do Medusa right without SoD.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BryonD, post: 5279316, member: 957"] It has amused me from time to time that the Gorgon monster is unrelated to Gorgons. But that is not the problem. Ultimately the gorgon is just a monster that happens to have that name. Clearly the pertification theme is borrowed over, but it is still a completely different monster. Not everyone named Hank is a home run hitting hall of famer. Really, if you want an example of "wrongness" that I accept, the fact that "medusa" is a race in D&D would be much better. Medusa in 4E is supposed to be Medusa and it is wrong. You could easily play 4E with the house-rule that if you fail a single save against her gaze you instantly turn to stone. You could re-introduce SoD throughout 4E. But the debate at hand isn't 4E itself, but the attitude on SoD, and clearly the design idea behind 4E supports anti-SoD. You could have a monster in 3E called the Medufa, or any other name you wanted. And give it all the exact abilities of the 4E monster called "Medusa". There is nothing wrong with that. Slow/para/stone is not an "unfun" mechanic. And if in your game, in any system, you have a 4e style "medusa" creature as a companion to a SoD Medusa, then my position is immediately resolved. The creature itself is fine. It is claiming it is "medusa" that fails. That said, I'm also a fan of SoD in general. I like Finger of Death. I like having adventurers who live in a seriously dangerous world and the potential for instant death may be around any corner. That is a separate point from : You can't do Medusa right without SoD. [/QUOTE]

Verification