Your choices are Kill, or ... Kill

[Gort]

Hmm, that's interesting. It kinda sacrifices realism somewhat (for instance, knocking someone out with crossbow fire, or a fireball?) for the opportunity to play a fairly bloodless game if you want to. You could represent the difference between knocked out as going for that final killing blow or just kicking the downed foe in the face, after which he has the good sense to stay down.

I suppose it's a quick houserule away to say, "DMs discretion if a particular attack can be used to knock someone out", if you want more realism in your knockout rules.

 

[Hussar]

Hmm, that's interesting. It kinda sacrifices realism somewhat (for instance, knocking someone out with crossbow fire, or a fireball?) for the opportunity to play a fairly bloodless game if you want to. You could represent the difference between knocked out as going for that final killing blow or just kicking the downed foe in the face, after which he has the good sense to stay down.

I suppose it's a quick houserule away to say, "DMs discretion if a particular attack can be used to knock someone out", if you want more realism in your knockout rules.

Knocking out with a crossbow - "The bolt grazes his skull, spinning him around. He collapses on the ground, unconscious."

Knocking out with a fireball - "The roar of flame lifts him from his feet and he slams to the ground. You can still see the rise and fall of his chest as he lays there, smoking slightly."

Doesn't seem too difficult to me. The Player simply provides the direction - "I don't want X dead" and the DM fills in the script.

 

[Wormwood]

The Player simply provides the direction - "I don't want X dead" and the DM fills in the script.

Between this and the skill system, I see the DM 'filling in the script' a lot in 4e.

And I couldn't be more pleased.

 

[Fenes]

Between this and the skill system, I see the DM 'filling in the script' a lot in 4e.

And I couldn't be more pleased.

Indeed. Great flexibility, without handwaving the outcome away.

 

[Hussar]

I have to admit, it's going to take a fair bit of rearranging in my head to get into the mindset that the players are driving the story to a much larger degree than ever before. I'm not talking about the basic plot, players should always have a great deal of power there. But, in the scene by scene development of the campaign.

I think this is going to cause a lot of head scratching for the first while.

 

[ruleslawyer]

But I was the first to post about it! Therefore it's my idea. Publish or perish, you know, old bean.

Well, it *is* your idea, actually! I was just noting that it's very intuitive given (A)D&D's hit point mechanics from Day One, so I'm not sure why so many people seem to be having conceptual difficulties with it.

 

[Lackhand]

In fairness, Hong isn't on the side of the f4nboys. Hong is on the side of hong.

We just happen to have the misfortune to agree with him.

 

[pawsplay]

Because unlike a book that you'll spend a few days on (well its war and peace, so maybe a week or more ) this is a system you could get hours and hours and hours of enjoyment (or grief) out of.

If you think reading a D&D book is more valuable than reading a classic novel, I'm going to have to say we are talking about different things.

 

[pawsplay]

Because it is part of the hobby and you are curious about how they are doing things.

Being curious and being optimistic are not AT ALL the same thing.

 

[pawsplay]

No it doesn't. It raises, poses, suggests, inspires, creates, promotes that question. Begging the question is something else entirely. Sorry, but you're about the 10th person to misuse that phrase in the last few days and I had to get it off my chest.

No, I meant exactly that, and while you are welcome to disagree with my opinion having interpreted it, you obviously do not understand my opinion and would do well to exercise some civility before criticizing someone's English. Don't try to teach this hound how to hunt.