What the heck is "Unfun"?

[Raven Crowking]

How about just the first time Legolas rolls a 1 on an attack roll during the course of the session -- unless he specifically mentions keeping his quiver full?

(1) Legolas would automatically always specifically mention keeping his quiver full.

(2) What if that 1 was the first roll when he starts out for the day?

There's no reason some of those couldn't have been bundles of extra arrows, with Legolas refilling his quiver from those during "downtime".

The problem occurs because Legolas' quiver stays full when there is no "downtime" to go hunting through the luggage.

Point is, while it is amusing to point at Legolas always having six arrows in his quiver no matter how many he fires, it really isn't that big a deal.

You mention him using about 20 arrows in every fight (although you stopped mentioning the number of arrows when you got to the big fights) although he has six arrows at the start of each of those fights. Hmmm......

I can watch the movies (particularly the extended versions) and enjoy them, but it isn't "petty fault-finding" if it damages your enjoyment.

IMHO. YMMV.

 

[Vlos]

It's funny how people say if I roll a "1" and die that is "unfun"? If the only way you are going to die is on a "1", which means the only way your going to fail a save is on a "1" then I wonder why your playing? As stated this game is about heroic adventurers, going out and slaying creatures and evil people! Even in the movies the hero dies! So if you take out the auto fail on a "1", and also take out the Save or die spells, why even have spells? What is the point of adventuring?

Just get a big nurf bat and hit goffers on the head? No threat of dying there?

Yes not all game players like it the same, but some of us like the Threat of being able to have our characters face potential death when a powerful demon (or wizard) points his finger at you and calls up the infernal abyss to consume your soul in a powerful strike? You had better be one lucky soul to live through that. Now should that demon (or wizard) be able to do that every round, well maybe, but as a DM, I don't think most I know would do that even if the creature could. If it could I would have to question, why I was going up against it so ill'prepared. And if I was, then yes I would probably expect several of us to die...

But I would never classify it as unfun, that is the great adventure to slay the great demon lord!



Grappling, funny, in 1st Ed, there were few if any rules, the DM just winged it, and had you make a d20 check either based on THAC0 or a stat to see if you succeeded, now we actually have a set of rules. If you have a cheatsheet or custom character sheet rather than one of those cheap things WoTC gives you, you would have the formulas you need next to the types of attacks your characters make, thus its a non-issue. As a GM if I select a monster for an encounter that has Improved Grapple, I'm for sure going to look up the rule prior to the session and make sure it's on my cheat sheet so I don't slow down my players fun time.

If WoTC did their homework proper and created modules right, when they created a monster in the first place, they would put in the entry with a monster the rule for grapple next to the encounter area (or in a side bar).

I will admit not everything is 100% fluid, but I wouldn't call it unfun, otherwise I wouldn't be still playing, though in looking at the rulings that are coming for 4e, I am not happy, but I will hold my judgement.

 

[D.Shaffer]

Wow, I thought mods in this forum has rules against blatant attacks such as this.

They also have rules saying you should report the post, and not call it out in the thread itself so as to keep it from escalating. Back to the thread itself...

After reading through most of the bad feelings going on, I'd like to ask one question. Why are people getting so confrontational over different styles of play? Because that's exactly what I see happening. Someone says they dont like this particular aspect, and then someone jumps on them for it for playing 'Wrong'. (OMG! You dont like counting arrows? What, you cant do MATH? LOL. OMG! You hate save or die spells? WTF, I guess you dont like ANY sort of challenge at all, do you??) Having fun is having fun and not everyone is going to agree with what parts they find fun. Instead of immediately accusing the other guy of something, how about you try to understand their point of view, first?

In any case, when Wizards talks about 'Unfun', I believe they are talking about mechanics that their marketing research with players, or that they themselves, found annoying or less then stellar. Like it or not, DnD often is the entry level game for RPGs, much like Warhammer 40K is for minis games. Even people who DONT like DND will often have the books because it's one of the few games where you're almost gaurenteed to find players. For that reason, Wizards needs to cater to the greatest number of people they can. You might not like that reason, I have no doubt some of you will call it 'catering to the lowest common denominator', but if 80% of their gaming market doesnt like something in the game, they're going to change it, no matter how much the remaining 20% of the market likes it. House rule it, dont switch, or find a different game, but expecting them to cater to the minority is a bit silly and egotistical, IMO.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Grappling, funny, in 1st Ed, there were few if any rules, the DM just winged it, and had you make a d20 check either based on THAC0 or a stat to see if you succeeded, now we actually have a set of rules.

Here we have to disagree. If you look at the 1e DMG, there was a fairly complex and granular set of rules for grappling. It allowed for all sorts of interesting results, but it was cumbersome, not very well balanced, and not often used as a result.

The Unearthed Arcana tome included a new set of grappling rules, which had originally appeared in The Dragon.

RC

 

[Rolzup]

In my D&D game, each player chooses a RP goal based on their character's personality. Each game in which you meet your goal, you gain 1 AP. This is a modification of the Demogogues & Dynasties personality feat rules, and it is something that I would recommend to anyone. The advantages are:

(a) Gaining APs is completely in the player's hands.

(b) Gives a benefit for RPing an otherwise imprudent course of action.

(c) Another dimension to party cooperation to meet goals.

(d) Decouples APs and level.

(e) Grants no more than 1 AP per session.

(f) encourages inter-party RPing.


RC

I prefer giving the PCs more than just one action point, but everything really depends on what kind of rules you're using. Right now, for example, I'm using a set of action cards cobbled together from a couple of different sources. Get three per session, spend 'em where and how you want, and a collection of three cards (from any number of players) will keep a PC from dying.

My desires from such a system are twofold: Give the players a better chance to succeed when they REALLy need to do so, AND make things more interesting. With my current players, the cards did that better than action points could.

I'm curious to see what rules 4.0 uses, as I find the Eberron APs to be rather bland in play.

But in any case, we're diverging from the original topic somewhat.

I will once again mention the Raising the Flag rules, though, as they are entirely relevent to the original post: They allow a PLAYER to decide when something is important enough for his character to die for. And that's exactly the kind of thing that I want to see.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I prefer giving the PCs more than just one action point, but everything really depends on what kind of rules you're using. Right now, for example, I'm using a set of action cards cobbled together from a couple of different sources.

Swashbuckling cards? Those can be a lot of fun.

I made the switch to APs simply because, as with so much of the game, I was willing to rewrite what you could do with them.

Of course, in my game you can get your first Epic feat at 5th level......

 

[F4NBOY]

I have no doubt some of you will call it 'catering to the lowest common denominator', but if 80% of their gaming market doesnt like something in the game, they're going to change it, no matter how much the remaining 20% of the market likes it.

QFT.

If you are in the 20%, it's easier for you to update yourself than waiting for the big company to realease its main product aiming at your taste.
So all this nervous and agressive stress is fruitless.

 

[wgreen]

It's funny how people say if I roll a "1" and die that is "unfun"? If the only way you are going to die is on a "1",

Non sequitur.

which means the only way your going to fail a save is on a "1" then I wonder why your playing? As stated this game is about heroic adventurers, going out and slaying creatures and evil people! Even in the movies the hero dies! So if you take out the auto fail on a "1", and also take out the Save or die spells, why even have spells? What is the point of adventuring?

Non sequitur.

Look, guys, you could remove save-or-die spells from 3.x without removing all hint of challenge, risk, and death. This isn't difficult. Is it?

I like Andy Collins's variant for save-or-die effects. Just convert it into a crapload of damage. Still pretty deadly, but not as randomly so. And for fear effects and the like, just allow a Will save every round, like hold person does. Heck, make it a really friggin' hard Will save, if you like. But give the player something to do, for heaven's sake, so he doesn't have to go read a magazine while everyone else has fun.

-Will

 

[Raven Crowking]

Look, guys, you could remove save-or-die spells from 3.x without removing all hint of challenge, risk, and death. This isn't difficult. Is it?

I actually like this idea for many things. Ex: Instead of petrification being all-or-nothing, you take Dexterity damage until it is reversed or you turn to stone......

That seems more fun, more tense, and more interesting to me.

RC

 

[hong]

I like the rule that's been proposed by several people now: instakills remain instakills, but only have full effect below a hit point-based threshold. This is basically extending the power word spells to all instakill effects. You can combine this with hero points/fate points as well.