Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="phloog" data-source="post: 4488577" data-attributes="member: 59219">We disagree on degree of convolution (?).&nbsp;Also, my group for the most part engages in good descriptions on their own.&nbsp;I agree and am fine with the fact that HP are abstract.&nbsp;However, 4E for the most part (and in truth 3.5 before it) DEMANDS a grid with miniatures, and the power I referenced which sucks in opponents COULD be abstracted...BUT...&nbsp;It becomes freakish and convoluted because then you have to assume that the grid itself and DISTANCES are abstracted, or you have to go with the magic-like explanation of &quot;the fighter can draw in any foe, with no ability to resist and independent of that foe's wisdom, willpower, intelligence, mastery of tactics, etc&quot;.&nbsp; &nbsp;The explanation must involve some supernatural or bizarre gravity or influence over others, or you must take some path like assuming that all those foes were actually closer than originally depicted on the grid.&nbsp;Any explanation in martial/mundane terms doesn't work unless the DM puts artificial, against-the-book, and potentially unbalancing limitations on the power - like &quot;This power requires an attack against Will to affect someone&quot;, or &quot;this power doesn't work on really smart dudes&quot;&nbsp;Example: faced with a group of six foes, two of which are genius-intellect frail wizards, and the rest of which are moronic orcs, this warrior somehow does something in his action that makes not only the four orcs rush to him for their free beatdown, but also causes the wizards to be compelled against all their will and sense to move within striking distance of the fighter, disregarding their arsenal of spells and deciding that getting into dagger range is a good idea.&nbsp;I've heard explanations that it's a dare, or a taunt, or false show of weakness that draws others in for the attack....this type of explanation either causes the wizards or any other targets to lose all willpower and sense, or it gives the warrior legendary abilities to taunt, bluff, etc....abilities which vanish in other situations.&nbsp; I was originally open to, and in fact asked for explanations that would make sense, but after looking at all those offered it just didn't work for me.&nbsp;For me this power and others like it, and not the healing or other rules, are the things that make it more like a videogame.&nbsp; And again, it might be insanely fun to have a warrior with a 'power' that allows this.&nbsp;There is in D&amp;D like in movies a level of entertainment that allows you to suspend your disbelief...this kind of power is not something I can overlook myself.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="phloog, post: 4488577, member: 59219"] We disagree on degree of convolution (?). Also, my group for the most part engages in good descriptions on their own. I agree and am fine with the fact that HP are abstract. However, 4E for the most part (and in truth 3.5 before it) DEMANDS a grid with miniatures, and the power I referenced which sucks in opponents COULD be abstracted...BUT... It becomes freakish and convoluted because then you have to assume that the grid itself and DISTANCES are abstracted, or you have to go with the magic-like explanation of "the fighter can draw in any foe, with no ability to resist and independent of that foe's wisdom, willpower, intelligence, mastery of tactics, etc". The explanation must involve some supernatural or bizarre gravity or influence over others, or you must take some path like assuming that all those foes were actually closer than originally depicted on the grid. Any explanation in martial/mundane terms doesn't work unless the DM puts artificial, against-the-book, and potentially unbalancing limitations on the power - like "This power requires an attack against Will to affect someone", or "this power doesn't work on really smart dudes" Example: faced with a group of six foes, two of which are genius-intellect frail wizards, and the rest of which are moronic orcs, this warrior somehow does something in his action that makes not only the four orcs rush to him for their free beatdown, but also causes the wizards to be compelled against all their will and sense to move within striking distance of the fighter, disregarding their arsenal of spells and deciding that getting into dagger range is a good idea. I've heard explanations that it's a dare, or a taunt, or false show of weakness that draws others in for the attack....this type of explanation either causes the wizards or any other targets to lose all willpower and sense, or it gives the warrior legendary abilities to taunt, bluff, etc....abilities which vanish in other situations. I was originally open to, and in fact asked for explanations that would make sense, but after looking at all those offered it just didn't work for me. For me this power and others like it, and not the healing or other rules, are the things that make it more like a videogame. And again, it might be insanely fun to have a warrior with a 'power' that allows this. There is in D&D like in movies a level of entertainment that allows you to suspend your disbelief...this kind of power is not something I can overlook myself. [/QUOTE]

Verification