Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Fifth Element" data-source="post: 5968992" data-attributes="member: 48135">Yet in 4E, when a fighter &quot;forgets&quot; how to do a maneuver after using it, the game is vilified for it. A wizard has cast this spell every day for the past two years, and yet he keeps forgetting how to cast it, even after just casting it. Surely if you've just done the thing, you're more likely to remember how to do that thing?There are demands that the fighter-exploit thing &quot;make sense&quot; in the game, because wizards have a structure they have to adhere to for &quot;it's magic&quot; to work. But if the wizard's structure doesn't make any more sense than &quot;just because&quot;, that's not much of a hurdle. It's an arbitrary stricture, and as such any arbitrary stricture we choose to put on the fighter should do just as well.The fighter forgets how to do the thing until he gets some rest and thinks about it again. There, now his structure makes as much sense as a wizard's.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Fifth Element, post: 5968992, member: 48135"] Yet in 4E, when a fighter "forgets" how to do a maneuver after using it, the game is vilified for it. A wizard has cast this spell every day for the past two years, and yet he keeps forgetting how to cast it, even after just casting it. Surely if you've just done the thing, you're more likely to remember how to do that thing? There are demands that the fighter-exploit thing "make sense" in the game, because wizards have a structure they have to adhere to for "it's magic" to work. But if the wizard's structure doesn't make any more sense than "just because", that's not much of a hurdle. It's an arbitrary stricture, and as such any arbitrary stricture we choose to put on the fighter should do just as well. The fighter forgets how to do the thing until he gets some rest and thinks about it again. There, now his structure makes as much sense as a wizard's. [/QUOTE]

Verification