Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ProfessorCirno" data-source="post: 5414358" data-attributes="member: 65637">If you don't have an argument or response, don't post.Again, I'm not getting it.You're saying that 4e needs all these rules for being a baron or a lord or starting a guild but those have never existed.Watch, I'm about to spell out all the rules for being a lord in previous editions.&nbsp; Ready?&quot;When a fighter hits level 9 they attract some followers if they have a castle.&quot;Boom.&nbsp; That's it.&nbsp; That's the entire rule(s).&nbsp; It mentions that the DM will know more rules to go beyond that, but I've read the DMG and I don't recall ever seeing them there (certainly correct me if I'm wrong!)I again find the complaints funny, as when 3e came out, people were demanding the opposite you were.&nbsp; &quot;RULES for the 'temporal world,'&quot; they would say, though they probably didn't use the phrase temporal world, &quot;that destroys the roleplaying!&nbsp; You aren't meant to have a rule or mechanic for everything!&nbsp; Let people play out such things!&quot;It's a funny trend.&nbsp; The game bulks up in non-combat rules and it's destroying roleplaying and becoming a hack and slash.&nbsp; The game thins out the non-combat rules and...it's destroying roleplaying and becoming a hack and slash.Me personally?&nbsp; I'm happy without the rules and mechanics there (though granted I've been on a bit of a rules-lite binge for awhile now).&nbsp; It means that players can literally do anything they think of without having to refer to charts (old editions) or a thousand rules (3e) or individual powers (4e).&nbsp; They want to be a lord?&nbsp; Fantastic!&nbsp; I don't need rules for that.&nbsp; We can play it by ear!&nbsp; Maybe big decisions come up and they need to decide on a course of action.&nbsp; I don't need a set of rules for that!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ProfessorCirno, post: 5414358, member: 65637"] If you don't have an argument or response, don't post. Again, I'm not getting it. You're saying that 4e needs all these rules for being a baron or a lord or starting a guild but those have [I]never[/I] existed. Watch, I'm about to spell out all the rules for being a lord in previous editions. Ready? "When a fighter hits level 9 they attract some followers if they have a castle." Boom. That's it. That's the entire rule(s). It mentions that the DM will know more rules to go beyond that, but I've read the DMG and I don't recall ever seeing them there (certainly correct me if I'm wrong!) I again find the complaints funny, as when 3e came out, people were demanding the opposite you were. "RULES for the 'temporal world,'" they would say, though they probably didn't use the phrase temporal world, "that [B]destroys[/B] the roleplaying! You aren't meant to have a rule or mechanic for everything! Let people play out such things!" It's a funny trend. The game bulks up in non-combat rules and it's destroying roleplaying and becoming a hack and slash. The game thins out the non-combat rules and...it's destroying roleplaying and becoming a hack and slash. Me personally? I'm happy without the rules and mechanics there (though granted I've been on a bit of a rules-lite binge for awhile now). It means that players can literally do anything they think of without having to refer to charts (old editions) or a thousand rules (3e) or individual powers (4e). They want to be a lord? Fantastic! [I]I don't need rules for that.[/I] We can play it by ear! Maybe big decisions come up and they need to decide on a course of action. I don't need a set of rules for that! [/QUOTE]

Verification