Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Felon" data-source="post: 4601493" data-attributes="member: 8158">As far as exceptions making the game harder to design and run, I suppose one could argue that facilitating a rut of predictable copy-paste tactics makes for a game that's easy to design and run. However, that's putting makeup on a pig. Given the option between challenging players to be creative in selecting tactics and challenging them to be creative in how they execute the same tactic ad nauseum, I think I can put my finger on which sounds more appealing.As far as removing those special defenses from 4e being the most rational course of action, that is true given the edition we've been handed. Now characters have a few powers mapped to hotkeys and don't have any recourse for when a power fails other than to fall back on at-wills once they've shot their wad. Essentially, monsters have lost qualities that are both traditionally inherent and intuitively inherent to accommodate the limitations of the class powers system.As far as deeming a rationalization to be a commendable exercise in creativity, I deem that a rationalization in and of itself. It's making excuses for a lapse in ingenuity on the part of the designers to come up with a robust system that allows for mindless automotons and amorphous blobs to retain their distinctive defenseive qualities. Even coming up with the most clever rationalization in the world for why a horde of zombies is no more immune to fear or charms than a bunch of ordinary bandits, the simple reality is that the chief reason for a DM to toss out a horde of zombies has been largely nerfed. Like many monsters, their immunities were a big part of what defined them.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Felon, post: 4601493, member: 8158"] As far as exceptions making the game harder to design and run, I suppose one could argue that facilitating a rut of predictable copy-paste tactics makes for a game that's easy to design and run. However, that's putting makeup on a pig. Given the option between challenging players to be creative in selecting tactics and challenging them to be creative in how they execute the same tactic ad nauseum, I think I can put my finger on which sounds more appealing. As far as removing those special defenses from 4e being the most rational course of action, that is true given the edition we've been handed. Now characters have a few powers mapped to hotkeys and don't have any recourse for when a power fails other than to fall back on at-wills once they've shot their wad. Essentially, monsters have lost qualities that are both traditionally inherent and intuitively inherent to accommodate the limitations of the class powers system. As far as deeming a rationalization to be a commendable exercise in creativity, I deem that a rationalization in and of itself. It's making excuses for a lapse in ingenuity on the part of the designers to come up with a robust system that allows for mindless automotons and amorphous blobs to retain their distinctive defenseive qualities. Even coming up with the most clever rationalization in the world for why a horde of zombies is no more immune to fear or charms than a bunch of ordinary bandits, the simple reality is that the chief reason for a DM to toss out a horde of zombies has been largely nerfed. Like many monsters, their immunities were a big part of what defined them. [/QUOTE]

Verification