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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="D'karr" data-source="post: 6578113" data-attributes="member: 336">Off the top of my head without looking at anything I can make up descriptions for those, almost in seconds.<ul style="margin-left: 20px"> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Your attack knocks the snot out of your foe.  His stunned look advertises an opening for further attacks.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Your attack puts your foe off-balance, preventing him from easily reacting to things around him.</li> </ul>The point is that descriptions don't have to be hyper-detailed, just enough so that the flavor and the mechanics mesh.  I found 4e to be quite good at making the description and mechanics support each other, and because the descriptions were open-ended (malleable) if I found the description a poor fit, I could easily change it.When I read Basic D&D (Moldvay) most things were detailed in much less detail, and we still had a blast making stuff up.  Consequently the less bolted on description the more the game descriptions can be open-ended.For example did Fireball in Moldvay set things on fire?  Not according to the description, that was entirely left to the DM and players.  In other editions Fireball even had rules for melting gold.  Something that is absolutely ridiculous when the melting point of gold, and the length of time that the fire effect is in place is taken into account.I prefer the open-ended effect to the highly detailed one for one main reason, it keeps the game in the DM and player's hands instead of a game designer that knows nothing about us or our games.</blockquote>

Verification