Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Sacrosanct" data-source="post: 6647328" data-attributes="member: 15700">This is clear.&nbsp; Maybe this will explain better.&nbsp; Take this famous scene from Airplane:<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7fchtEJpy8" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7fchtEJpy8</a>It seems by comparison that 4e tells you exactly what that paper is for, and how you can use it.&nbsp; 5e is much more vague.&nbsp; 5e is Johnny.&nbsp; And I have a really hard time buying that you can do more improvisation with this item when you're limited to only using it a few clearly approved ways.&nbsp; Again, I think you're using &quot;improvise&quot; in a much different way than it's defined.&nbsp; Please note I'm not saying 4e is a &quot;worse&quot; game or anything like that.&nbsp; But it's very much focused on different goals.&nbsp; Clarity and clearly defined roles and objectives.&nbsp; That has a lot of benefits.&nbsp; But as a general rule, rigid definitions has never been the best way to support improvisation when compared to general guidelines.&nbsp; Ever take a drama class?&nbsp; Heck, I'm constantly being told that 4e was designed to take away DM fiat compared to other editions; to make every table the same with the same rulings.&nbsp; Rules over rulings is directly at odds with improvisation because the goal is to remove the gray areas.Are you telling me that you're having even the slightest difficulty in making that determination?&nbsp; If easy is 10, and medium is 15, then something that is moderately easy would be anything in between that.&nbsp; With bounded accuracy, a hard task is hard.&nbsp; PCs, especially when they become heroic levels, can complete &quot;impossible&quot; tasks over anyone else.&nbsp; The difficulty rating is always the same and uses the general population as a baseline.&nbsp; Not having 20 different definitions of what &quot;hard&quot; is for each of the levels is a very good thing because it removes needless clutter and complexity.&nbsp; I don't know about anyone else, but after playing for more than a session, I have a pretty good idea what the chances are for each PC at varying levels for succeeding at various tasks without needing additional rules or guidelines for it.&nbsp; I.e., I know that a high level PC who is proficient at a task will almost always succeed at a medium DC 15 check.&nbsp; Which they should.&nbsp; I shouldn't need extra rules telling me what &quot;medium&quot; means at every level.&nbsp; It's also impossible with 5e, because it's skill driven over level driven.&nbsp; I.e., a PC not proficient doesn't get their prof bonus, so two 15th level PCs would have much different rates of success.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Sacrosanct, post: 6647328, member: 15700"] This is clear. Maybe this will explain better. Take this famous scene from Airplane: [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7fchtEJpy8[/url] It seems by comparison that 4e tells you exactly what that paper is for, and how you can use it. 5e is much more vague. 5e is Johnny. And I have a really hard time buying that you can do [i]more[/i] improvisation with this item when you're limited to only using it a few clearly approved ways. Again, I think you're using "improvise" in a much different way than it's defined. Please note I'm not saying 4e is a "worse" game or anything like that. But it's very much focused on different goals. Clarity and clearly defined roles and objectives. That has a lot of benefits. But as a general rule, rigid definitions has never been the best way to support improvisation when compared to general guidelines. Ever take a drama class? Heck, I'm constantly being told that 4e was designed to take away DM fiat compared to other editions; to make every table the same with the same rulings. Rules over rulings is directly at odds with improvisation because the goal is to remove the gray areas. Are you telling me that you're having even the slightest difficulty in making that determination? If easy is 10, and medium is 15, then something that is moderately easy would be anything in between that. With bounded accuracy, a hard task is hard. PCs, especially when they become heroic levels, can complete "impossible" tasks over anyone else. The difficulty rating is always the same and uses the general population as a baseline. Not having 20 different definitions of what "hard" is for each of the levels is a very good thing because it removes needless clutter and complexity. I don't know about anyone else, but after playing for more than a session, I have a pretty good idea what the chances are for each PC at varying levels for succeeding at various tasks without needing additional rules or guidelines for it. I.e., I know that a high level PC who is proficient at a task will almost always succeed at a medium DC 15 check. Which they should. I shouldn't need extra rules telling me what "medium" means at every level. It's also impossible with 5e, because it's skill driven over level driven. I.e., a PC not proficient doesn't get their prof bonus, so two 15th level PCs would have much different rates of success. [/QUOTE]

Verification