Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jasin" data-source="post: 4900611" data-attributes="member: 7531">Yes, I sort of glossed over the option to both regain the x/rest resources and keep (i.e. recast) the buffs. There's a cost, but it's not unmanageably high.The diametrically opposed mindsets I was talking about were"balance problems? a real roleplayer doesn't care about balance because he will implement his concept regardless of whether it's mechanically strong or weak"vs."balance problems? let's isolate them and address them".I find the former view infinitely annoying, because I find it most often punishes those that the holder of the view would ostensibly want to reward. Ignoring balance problems in 3.5 doesn't punish the beat-the-game guy who just plays the druid (or whatever is strongest), it punishes the guy who is into wuxia and plays the sword-wielding monk and ends up missing out on flurry of blows (or whatever specific concept someone thinks is cool, but doesn't work merely because of rule idiosyncrasies).The beat-the-game mindset is just as annoying on the face of it, but it's somehow less pernicious because it's easier to identify as problematic and address.Ultimately, though, from what I'm getting, your mindset is actually closer to "a balance problem exists not when there's an imbalance (which is practically unavoidable), but when the imbalance diminishes the enjoyment of the game". Yes?And I'm not picking on you, or your design, just seizing the opportunity to pick the brain of someone whom I've come to respect as a game designer in record time. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I don't think player entitlement is bad. I agree with the way you phrased it in the book, it's bad if it comes at the expense of the DM. And I think that players are justified in feeling entitled to having their quarterstaff not suck when compared to the long spear.I would agree, however, that the impulse to seize even the tiniest bonus and to label a quarterstaff as sucking just because of a 1-point difference in damage is tyranny of the rules.Personal experience: back in the 2E days, longswords were 1d8/1d12 (vs. Medium and smaller opponents/vs. Large and larger) and battle axes were 1d8/1d8. Dwarves still used battle axes, because what with all the DM fiat going on, the wonky 2E rules that could be pulled out, whether to the PCs advantage or detriment, the difference just got lost in the noise. This was true even for dwarves played by the beat-the-game folks.With a tighter, more transparent ruleset, smaller differences are relatively more obvious. Now, transparency is good, but when the pervading atmosphere suggests that the only way to be awesome is within the rules, I think people can't be blamed overmuch for hunting for every last bit of awesomeness within the rules, including looking for the upgrade from 1d6 to 1d8.Drifting further away, I think this is one of the flaws of 4E. With a completely unified framework, it's very easy to notice that the other guy's 7th-level encounter power deals 3d6 to your 2d8 and feel envious. It's not as easy to compare enervation and Whirlwind Attack.This is one of the reasons why I've come to like action points, Exalted's stunts, and similar meta-mechanics: they let the DM enjoy all the benefits of a well-ordered system and yet inject a measure refreshing chaos when required.Anyway, another rules question. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Since the new AoO rules only smack you for leaving a threatened area, does that mean that being able to attack inside your reach (spiked chain, monk w/long spear, giant) is a disadvantage (in that respect) compared to wielding a polearm? Or is the intent that closing with someone with a polearm doesn't provoke an AoO, even if you enter and then leave their threatened area?</blockquote>

Verification