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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Melhaic" data-source="post: 5964320" data-attributes="member: 57361">I have never understood why folks act like the fighter (and by extension, other martial characters) are boring if they don't have several mechanically distinct combat abilities. Coming up through AD&D, the idea that it was tedious to make attack rolls just never occurred to us. Spells were spells, backstabs were backstabs, etc. The d20 systems added complexity to the basic formula : describe intent, roll dice, describe outcome. At the end of the day, it was the same thing. I can see how this could be very mundane if presented in purely mechanical terms:Player: I attack orc A. (Rolls 13to hit)(Rolls 8 damage)DM: You hit. The orc is hurt.Player: I make my shield bash (Rolls 20)(10 damage)DM: Crit! You drop himYou can achieve highly complex and interactive combat simply by putting some narrative effort in:DM: The orc swings high with his axe, but you are able to deflect it upward with your shield.Player: Hmm, if his weapon is high... I stab at his lower torso, away from his axe (Rolls 13)(8 damage).DM: Your sword makes a deep gash near his hip, and he hunkers to cover his wound...Player: I come at his face with the leading edge of my shield (20, 10 damage).DM: Your shield catches him directly in the windpipe, with a oddly clear crunching sound; he goes down with bubbling blood pouring down his chin.Same combat. No powerz needed. The inclusion of hardwired narrative such as forced pushes and (especially) damage on a miss really interfere with player creativity and the ability of the DM to weave an interesting narrative. Why go through all of the trouble to describe combat if the description is hardwired into "Frothing Badger Pounce"?I don't play the game for fun mechanical wargaming, maybe you do, and that is where the divide is. I play so me and my friends can play make believe about dragons, knights, wizards and such. I don't give a damn if combat power is balanced between classes, or if everybody has something mechanically interesting to do each round (if they are good at the game they will find something regardless): I just want a some ground rules for the make believe. Because of all of this, I am certain that some part of the D&D community will be deeply disappointed with the upcoming edition, rule modules or no rule modules. I simply don't believe that the more complex (powers based) characters can coexist beside the more simple old school PCs: the narrative would suffer. Do I, as the DM, run combat completely differently for the two players? I think that the community is split on the kind of game it wants in a fundamental way, and not just along the 3e/4e axis: I have played with folks that loved any edition you can name that have the mechanical/wargamey attitude that just doesn't mesh with my much looser disregard for the rules. So here's hoping for a fast loose game with flat math and fighters who fight with pointy bits of metal, not "Flaming Hyena Smashes". Let's let our imaginations do the heavy lifting, not the combat rules.</blockquote>

Verification