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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 3789047" data-attributes="member: 22424">I completely disagree with your assertion. Since the 'old-school' style you describe is rules-neutral, it won't matter what the rules actually say, if the group as a whole want to play in that style then they will. If the DM wants to play in that style but the players don't then there will be a problem... but that's a problem of conflicting styles, and not an issue of the system not supporting a given style.Simply put: do we really need the rules to talk about purchasing, and proper use of, iron spikes for it to support an 'old school' style? Surely not!1e: The player says, "there might be a trap here," the thief rolls Find Traps.3e: The player says, "there might be a trap here," the Rogue (or perhaps another character) rolls Search.How is that in any way different?Unless, of course, the party are in the habit of simply searching everywhere... in which case you eliminate the player talking at all, and go straight to the rolls, in both cases.Where there is a (potential) issue in 3.x is that there is no penalty for a failed Search check - if the Rogue fails to find a trap he doesn't run a risk of setting it off by mistake. Thus, the Rogue can always 'take 20' on those Search rolls, which is unforunate.However, to sort this, one can House Rule 3e with two simple rules:1) If a Search check fails to find a trap by 5 or more, it sets it off.2) Knowledge (dungeoneering) does not exist.... and the problem is solve. Given the extremely minor nature of these rules, I submit that the existing rules system does support that 'old school' style, if it is what the whole group wants.And I cannot imagine 4e being any different. Yes, there will be more character-building options in the game... but if the group is so inclined they will be able to short-cut much of that by always taking the next talent in the tree, and only using feats, spells and options from the core rules (defining 'core' the old school way, of course <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=":)" />). Of course, having not seen 4e, I might be completely wrong about this... but I would be very surprised.</blockquote>

Verification