Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 6061632" data-attributes="member: 48965">Yes, in general... and no it's not an odd build or odd NPC... it's a normal ranger and a monster of equal level I am comparing it to.A first level fighter in Moldvay can kill most anything with equal HD in one hit... And a 4e Fighter is now more based around defending than attacking... but the Rogue and Ranger would disagree with your assertion that a PC cannot kill a normal monster with one attack. This assertion is just flat out wrong... If the PC rolls well enough to hit and enough damage... the decapitation is not a "try". So with a good enough roll the PC can kill a monster in one round... what he can't ever do is complete his objetive in  a skill challenge with less than the pre-determined successes.  As another example of how one can end a combat in one round, in the right situation the choice to narrate pushing an enemy off a cliff and succeeding at it mechanically allows one to circumvent the normal attack and hp depletion routine of combat.So again, the actual plan, feasibility, effectiveness, situation and preparation, ultimately have no bearing on success or failure... only whether one has rolled a pre-determined number of successes or failures actually matters.I call it narrative filler because ultimately the choices, plans, decisions,setting, etc. beyond using something to garner one more success or failure... have no bearing on your success or failure for SC's... it comes down to whether you roll x successes or Y failures that's it.  I am not speaking of boring narrative or railroading (though deciding beforehand that the player must get X successes before Y failures before they even approach the situation does seem... a bit linear.).  I  am speaking of narrative filler in the sense that what you narrate as a player doesn't affect anything about the SC or achieving your goal. The impression that the 4e SC  rules left me with was that the use of a magic item would be the same as garnering a single success for the SC...Is the above just how you would handle it or is something like this addressed in the rules somewhere for 4e's SC's?No, they are different... as just one example take this passage from Heroquest..."If the action attempts to leapfrog a series of interesting obstacles to solve the main problem of the story in a disappointingly abrupt fashion, assign a Very High Resistance. (If they succeed, you must then find a new main problem arising from their solution of the one you were prepared for.)"So even in Heroquest you can come up with something brilliant and roll high enough to basically auto-success an extended challenge... Is there anything like this in 4e's rules?Hey I have no issue if you enjoy SC's... but that also doesn't mean I'm not going to say what I think are problems with the mechanic. As far as Heroquest goes... I honestly see very little discussion of it at all on most rpg forums, but I'll take your word that it is enjoyed by many... it just personally wasn't me or my groups cup of tea. That said Heroquest's rules are, IMO, much better for this type of play than 4e's rules are and I think sometimes, because you've read and played Heroquest... you fill in the gaps and problems of 4e's SC mechanics with stuff that isn't really part of the 4e rules or advice...</blockquote>

Verification