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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Keldryn" data-source="post: 5571230" data-attributes="member: 11999">It's actually my sister (the bard's player) who is stuck on this one.  Using Viscious Mockery on the Iron Circle soldier of course ended up as "your mother was a hamster, and your father smelt of elderberries."  She thought it was weird that insulting him would cause psychic damage, so I explained that the power is actually a magic spell and doesn't represent her character just hurling insults.  Using it on a stirge caused her some difficulty as she questioned how insulting a stirge ("You suck!" of course) could make it angry.  I reminded her that the power is actually a magic spell.  Using it on the ooze brought up the issue as to whether or not an ooze can feel angry.I dread the day when it gets used against a skeleton, zombie, or golem.Combat in my pre-3E games was never the major focus, and while it didn't offer the wide array of tactical options that 4E does, it was over fairly quickly.  Battles were short bursts of excitement in a game that was primarily about exploration.Yes, and this doesn't appeal to all players.  Also, when battles routinely take 45 minutes to an hour or more, it can really make a jarring transition from exploration and role-playing to tactical miniatures battles.  Some of my players said that it felt like playing two separate games, and I agree with that.I'm not a fan of skill challenges... they just feel too rigidly-structured and I don't quite get why they're any better than just playing it out.  When I've run skill challenges, my players frequently didn't use their skills but came up with other ideas that fit the situation better.  Yes, I can count those as successes, but why bother with the formal structure?Not at all.  You make some good suggestions.</blockquote>

Verification