Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ExploderWizard" data-source="post: 4239886" data-attributes="member: 66434">I can deal with certain gamist concepts. Hit points have always been abstract in every edition, described as luck, magical protections, ect. Action points are fine too. A good mechanic to handle those moments of heroic effort. A great deal of things in fantasy "don't make sense" when viewed under the microscope of logic but within the construct of the game world there should be some consistency. If an action produces a specific reaction then it really shouldn't be changed depending on if it happens to a PC vs an NPC for example. One thing about this edition that has been talked about a lot is how the rules were constructed to eliminate the  "unfun" aspects of earlier editions. The question becomes, unfun for whom? It appears that being affected by any spell that doesn't just cause damage is unfun so saving throws become a coin toss. Being a wizard then becomes unfun because nobody is effected by even the most powerful spells for more than a round or so. This leads to all sorts of tail chasing with every game mechanic. Rules implementations like this are sort of a reactionary design theory that has no end. It seems like we have a classic case of "Mexicali Soup" here. All that said, I am still looking forward to trying out the rules and seeing firsthand how they handle.</blockquote>