NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ExploderWizard" data-source="post: 5463230" data-attributes="member: 66434">By pure decree no. By taking notice of surroundings and using them to full advantage the answer switches to possibly.    The actions should be such that they could solve the problem. The issue I have with the structure is that the actual content of player input is limited by the mechanical structure. No matter how brilliant an idea, or how well it is executed, the value is identical- 1 success. In combat a character at least has options and opportunities that go beyond "a hit".    The artificial pacing is what makes things incredibly boring. In a combat, the hit points are a set threshold yet the pace of progress can vary dramatically. Critical hits, using "big gun" abilities and so forth can make the pace of any given combat unpredictable. That is what makes excitement.  Perhaps if there were a way for the quality of player input to have more than a premeasured degree of effectiveness, the whole thing wouldn't seem so artificial. What if a really awesome idea could suddenly be worth two or three successes by itself if pulled off? This would mean that the cleverness of the actual player would have a direct mechanical effect upon the resolution of the situation. That is what 4E is sorely missing IMHO.  Premeasured formulas produce balance, predictable results and boredom. What if damage was as structured as the skill challenge system? Each hit will do X damage. Each character can get hit X number of times. The players must score more hits on the monsters than they take or the combat is lost. Would combat be more or less exciting this way?</blockquote>

Verification