Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Erechel" data-source="post: 6650581" data-attributes="member: 6784868">Where I was saying that 4th edition was obliterating the prior editions, I was saying that there was an effort on saying that the edition is "superior" to every other edition prior, in every aspect possible. "New", "Better maths" and such. Also, I was saying that, where 3rd edition take the time to make conversion guides of characters of prior editions, 4th edition don't (at least not as a baseline). I'm also talking about the fanbase, not the system itself, claiming its superiority (even here), and claiming how "better" they are for accepting change (I entered in a long discussion a few months ago because of this). Let's not forget that it was the edition that skyrocketeed the Edition Wars. And that is not simply because the product itself is better/worse than others, but by publicity, fanbase, and everything else around the game. It iIs all the circle around the system, not the system itself what I'm critizicing (which, by the way I don't quite like for several reasons, but YMMV and the waters are already revolted, so...)About the "ironical" reading of the thread name, it is not the case. It is a clear statement. But, lets do the exercise: I hardly see keeping low level armies relevant as a flaw, or a tone-down of epicness. So, you say that the Fall of Húrin in the Nirnaeth Aernoediad isn't epic? He was standing with a decaying army at the top of a cliff, his brother fallen at his side, crying Aurë entuluva! but ultimately being defeated by a massive orc army. This is not epic? Or the Battle of Whispering Wood, where Jaime Lannister was captured? Or the trolloc invasion on Two Rivers in WOT? Epic battles all of them, with massive or discrete numbers. And the main characters reveal to be very relevant, but not flawless. It's not the Big Damn Hero fighting alone against hordes without a sweat, but leading his limited resources to success, sacrificing, taking harsh choices, being injured or in the brink of death. It is one of the reasons why Batman is usually more popular than Superman: because we know that a lucky bullet can kill Batman, and still he fights gods (and beats the crap of them: Dark Knight Returns, Final Crisis, etc). Wits over superpowers.I think that keeping armies relevant adds another layer to the game, and there is plenty of space in 5ed to simulate it. Several of my campaigns are centered around colliding armies, or amasing enough resources to rise one, equip it and train it well. In the DMG they are several optional rules to keep loyalty, morale, honor and such things important to keep the game in this level. It is also a safe ward against psychotic characters to easily overthrowing kings only because they can. Of course, they could still assassinate them, but they have to be stealthy, cunning, and overall it's more difficult. And at the same time, the BA keeps meaningful the low level characters. I absolutely love this factor.I also love the subsystems. It requires a little mastery to know everything in the game, but the classes itself are fairly simple, with enough general mechanics to keep the game balanced, and enough variety to make a wizard feel and play different than a warlock or a sorcerer. I usually play fighters and wizards, but in a campaign mastered by a friend I've tried the warlock, and I absolutely love how different it is to the wizard. I had a harsh time deciding which Invocations take to second level: my warlock has a Great Other patron (and I chose Lord Morpheus, from Sandman, that is utterly alien although in some way familiar), and given this, I finally chose Misty Visions (to reflect the Shaper aspect of the Dream, and to tell stories with the phantasmagory of Silent Image) and Mask of Many Faces (Dream of the Endless shows different faces to everyone watching it, and changes is aspect quite often even in the same scene). Also, I've given the Awakened Mind voice a monotone sound, to reflect better the creepy voice of Dream, although my character is calishite, so his voice sounds arabian.Celtavian, the dragon itself is a terrifying presence that almost every archer has never encountered before. I, as a GM, would check morale every round. And you can easily justify by this means why a dragon would Polymorph to keep low profile, or command/ hire goblins, orcs or whatever. But nevertheless, I've encountered with this problem in every edition, only to be resolved by the "wild card" factor of the heroes. I see the heroes as a breakage of the status quo: an advantage in a risky situation. This was always a factor in my games, and I've considered a lot. I don't quite like the Faerûn approach to adventurers; I keep my adventurers grounded with loyalty, duty or plain profit. They can be part of the archers that are going to attack the dragon, the captains commanding them, or the sneaky adventurers that drive the dragon insane enough to go out and be distracted from the archers.</blockquote>

Verification