Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 5923388" data-attributes="member: 957">Hi there.Not around much lately.&nbsp; Good chance that will be the trend we will see....Anyway, just for the record....&nbsp; <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&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />BS!!!There has NEVER (pre-4E) been anything close to an overt implication that you could so much as GLANCE at Medusa and actually SEE her and do anything less than instantly turn to stone.&nbsp; Period.I *WILL* concede that the rules took for granted the idea that the players got the premise of Medusa and don't bother to explain the obvious.&nbsp; This opens up the door to ignoring the obvious.&nbsp; And thus the rules do permit pointless interpretations.&nbsp; It is fundamental that the versions of the game have always allowed for fate to allow a character to escape a pending fate.&nbsp; Saving throws allow for this in a simple and functional manner.&nbsp; Allowing a saving throw when faced with a threat of &quot;seeing&quot; Medusa is completely reasonable.&nbsp; To then turn around and force the implication that Medusa was seen but the effect was shrugged off is reading outside of the actual text and throwing away common sense to boot.&nbsp; Pre-4E I never had a conversation that even approached this concept.&nbsp; Post 4E with its kid gloves approach, it is uncommon, but not even rare, much less unheard of.&nbsp; Which is just one more grain of sand on the scale of complaints against 4E.Yes, you can corrupt the reading of the rules and the game will function quite nicely with Medusa staring contests.&nbsp; The idea that this was remotely intended in absurd.&nbsp; If Pre-4E D&amp;D had been played this way AND that mentality was built into the mechanics throughout the game system then pre-4E D&amp;D would have been significantly less popular than it was.If future editions of D&amp;D elect to cling to this mentality, that same weight will undermine them.&nbsp; I have no doubt there will be a niche that won't LOVE it that way.&nbsp; But that process will never achieve going back to being the gold standard of RPGs.IMO.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BryonD, post: 5923388, member: 957"] Hi there. Not around much lately. Good chance that will be the trend we will see.... Anyway, just for the record.... :) BS!!! There has NEVER (pre-4E) been anything close to an overt implication that you could so much as GLANCE at Medusa and actually SEE her and do anything less than instantly turn to stone. Period. I *WILL* concede that the rules took for granted the idea that the players got the premise of Medusa and don't bother to explain the obvious. This opens up the door to ignoring the obvious. And thus the rules do permit pointless interpretations. It is fundamental that the versions of the game have always allowed for fate to allow a character to escape a pending fate. Saving throws allow for this in a simple and functional manner. Allowing a saving throw when faced with a threat of "seeing" Medusa is completely reasonable. To then turn around and force the implication that Medusa was seen but the effect was shrugged off is reading outside of the actual text and throwing away common sense to boot. Pre-4E I never had a conversation that even approached this concept. Post 4E with its kid gloves approach, it is uncommon, but not even rare, much less unheard of. Which is just one more grain of sand on the scale of complaints against 4E. Yes, you can corrupt the reading of the rules and the game will function quite nicely with Medusa staring contests. The idea that this was remotely intended in absurd. If Pre-4E D&D had been played this way AND that mentality was built into the mechanics throughout the game system then pre-4E D&D would have been significantly less popular than it was. If future editions of D&D elect to cling to this mentality, that same weight will undermine them. I have no doubt there will be a niche that won't LOVE it that way. But that process will never achieve going back to being the gold standard of RPGs. IMO. [/QUOTE]

Verification