My Least Favourite Thing About 4e

Don't get me wrong. I'm not a 4e hater. I like 4e enough that I am a D&D Insider subscriber. There is just one thing about the game that I really, really hate.

Forced balance.

If a rogue goes up behind a skeleton and sneak attacks them, they get to do extra damage. This makes me mad. The Sneak Attack power represents stabbing vital bits. The skeleton has no vital bits.

If a wizard wants to blast a fire elemental with a fireball, it works just fine. Fire elemental have no fire resistance. I think I remember a developer saying this was intentional.

I understand there things make the game more fair, but at what cost to realism? I'm not saying D&D should be pure simulation, I just think the developers went too far in making a balanced game. This needs to be fixed in 5e.
My Twitter
The skeleton has no vital bits.

Yes, it does. We already went over this during the trasition from 3.5 to 4E. It was stupid to begin with that sneak attack didn't work against everything. Now, we could easily justify reduced effect on some sorts of creatures, but every creature that I can think of short of oozes and swarms has vulnerable parts, including most undead and constructs.

If a wizard wants to blast a fire elemental with a fireball, it works just fine. Fire elemental have no fire resistance. I think I remember a developer saying this was intentional.

If I slap you with a piece of meat, will it hurt?

Why, yes, as a matter of fact I am the Unfailing Arbiter of All That Is Good Design (Even More So Than The Actual Developers) TM Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further. Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
i think your two examples are pretty bad.

Who says that a skeleton doesnt havea vulnerable bit?  perhaps the animated skeleton has a magical thiny powering it and the rogue attacks it?

with the fire elemental, who says that fire elementals need to be fire immune or resistant?  Because it's always been like that?  Doesnt sound like too good of a reason.

Neither of these examples really have to do with balance. 

Play whatever the **** you want. Never Point a loaded party at a plot you are not willing to shoot. Arcane Rhetoric. My Blog.

i think your two examples are pretty bad.

 



Who says that a skeleton doesnt havea vulnerable bit?  perhaps the animated skeleton has a magical thiny powering it and the rogue attacks it?

It doesn't even have to be that complicated. A skeleton has joints. Joints are weak points. Attacking joints inhibits movement. Attacking a skeleton's shoulders, spine, knees, or hips is going to be more damaging to it than attacking its ribcage or skull.

Why, yes, as a matter of fact I am the Unfailing Arbiter of All That Is Good Design (Even More So Than The Actual Developers) TM Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further. Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
Btw, there are several elemental creatures that are resistant or immune to their own element, like archons or efreeti. Just not all of them. You know, variety.
Who says that a skeleton doesnt havea vulnerable bit?  perhaps the animated skeleton has a magical thiny powering it and the rogue attacks it?

It doesn't even have to be that complicated. A skeleton has joints. Joints are weak points. Attacking joints inhibits movement. Attacking a skeleton's shoulders, spine, knees, or hips is going to be more damaging to it than attacking its ribcage or skull.



True, the same goes with any other kinds of constructs as well.  

I totally agree with you. 

Play whatever the **** you want. Never Point a loaded party at a plot you are not willing to shoot. Arcane Rhetoric. My Blog.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not a 4e hater. I like 4e enough that I am a D&D Insider subscriber. There is just one thing about the game that I really, really hate.

Forced balance.

If a rogue goes up behind a skeleton and sneak attacks them, they get to do extra damage. This makes me mad. The Sneak Attack power represents stabbing vital bits. The skeleton has no vital bits.

If a wizard wants to blast a fire elemental with a fireball, it works just fine. Fire elemental have no fire resistance. I think I remember a developer saying this was intentional.

I understand there things make the game more fair, but at what cost to realism? I'm not saying D&D should be pure simulation, I just think the developers went too far in making a balanced game. This needs to be fixed in 5e.

What realism? I have no idea how a skeleton works and no reason to believe it doesn't have 'vital bits'. Same thing with a fire elemental. Humans are 98% water but water still kills us if we're dropped into it. Again, we have no idea how a fire elemental 'works', thus 'realism' is a meaningless concept here. You have expectations, which is fine, but where did those come from? Playing 3.5? I'll note that 1e AD&D elementals didn't have resistances to damage types. Neither were skeletons immune to sneak attack damage.

I don't have a problem with different creatures potentially having varied characteristics. I think it is worth asking the question though about what specific things we want and why. It is IMHO not a matter of 'fairness vs realism' but fun vs fun. Is it more fun to have skeletons more or less affected by certain things in order to have a greater variety of situations and tactics, or is it more fun not to bork rogues every time the DM wants to run an adventure full of undead?

One big lesson from 4e design would be to stick to bonuses rather than penalties. Maybe 'crushing weapons' do extra damage to skeletons. That makes a fun advantage to using a mace once in a while, but doesn't screw over the rogue. Likewise fire elementals could have vulnerability to cold damage rather than immunity/resistance to fire. Again, this avoids borking the pyromancer but gives the guy that picked up an ice weapon for the volcano adventure a little benefit.
That is not dead which may eternal lie
I want to take a moment to inject on what I think the OP is getting at by "realism".   I have always enjoyed AbdulAlhazrd's posts as a long-time lurker.  He gets really to the crux of it being fun vs fun.

Here is my perspective which is by no means absolute and represents what I would consider "fun":

First, I am of the opinion that the adventuring party is a team effort.  That means that not every party member will have the greatest impact on every situation.  Everybody contributes but not everybody contributes in a flashy sort of way every time. 

Ok, that's my preface. Now, on to the examples the OP brought up.  

1) Skeletons vs. Rogue's sneak attack.  In my mind, the rogue's sneak attack is "realistic" against a living breathing humanoid.  For the sake of fun, I could extend that to any living breathing alien physiology like an aboleth. For the sake of greater fun,  I could even accept because of the rogue's extensive knowledge of human anatomy that he struck a weak spot on the pelvis of the skeleton causing a complete collapse or a study of golem engineering revealed a deficiency in construction.   However, how about noncorporeal undead like wraiths or spectres? On this, I call BS. Maybe this kind of chesse can happen in Mystery Science Theater but not in a game that I would consider fun.

2)  Fire elementals vs fire.  Humanoid vs slab of meat. A fire elemental from the Elemental Plane of Fire or a human from the Elemental Plane of Meat.  Yeah, that is exactly the same. Dualism in action.  In 1e, Gary Gygax did not really spell this out but I bet if a magic-user tried a 1st level burning hands spell he would have laughed and shook his head. As would many who play 0e-3e but obviously not those who play 4th. To take a line from Seinfeld, "not that there is anything wrong with that"

I guess that is just how feel about and I am so thankful that I am not alone.  Just my two cents.
human from the Elemental Plane of Meat.


www.studio360.org/2011/nov/04/theyre-mad...
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
1) Skeletons vs. Rogue's sneak attack... However, how about noncorporeal undead like wraiths or spectres? On this, I call BS.

Like I said before, there are some instances where sneak attack probably shouldn't be a thing or should be much less of a thing, and insubstantial creatures qualify as one of them. 4E pretty much agrees, which is why insubstantial creatures take half damage. It also agrees in the case of swarms, which take half damage from melee and ranged attacks. Only really weird situation is with oozes.

Why, yes, as a matter of fact I am the Unfailing Arbiter of All That Is Good Design (Even More So Than The Actual Developers) TM Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further. Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
Undead have always made for sorta weird examples for the same reason that golems do - at the end of the day, they're inanimate objects given movement through magic, not actual living creatures.  I mean, the problem isn't just rogues sneak attacking it; how do you kill it with any sort of damage?  Sure, maybe the more meaty ones can be defeated with fire to leave nothing left, but trying to do just straight HP damage has me thinking of movies where the protagonists chop off a monster's arm or hand, and the arm/hand keeps crawling towards them.  Whereas in D&D the monster just sorta...stops after being stabbed enough times.

So really, it's less a problem with sneak attack and more a problem with HP being as abstract as it is.
For me,  the biggest question is not about how realistic the game should or shouldn't be. The question to me is the following:  How unrealistic it can be and still pretend that it is?  Abstract hit points fall in this category.  A golem that my character has chopped into multiple pieces that eventually dissipates the animation magic also falls in this category. A fire elemental hurt by fire doesn't really fit in mythical fantastical world view.
To be fair, fire elementals being killed by HP damage period is weird.  That's sorta what I'm getting at; on one hand it's weird to "sneak attack" an ooze or deal fire damage to a fire elemental, but from my perspective you dived into the weird the moment you fought sentient jello or a moving fire with angry eyebrows.
Undead have always made for sorta weird examples for the same reason that golems do - at the end of the day, they're inanimate objects given movement through magic, not actual living creatures.  I mean, the problem isn't just rogues sneak attacking it; how do you kill it with any sort of damage?


Blow off it's head.

Sure, maybe the more meaty ones can be defeated with fire to leave nothing left, but trying to do just straight HP damage has me thinking of movies where the protagonists chop off a monster's arm or hand, and the arm/hand keeps crawling towards them.  Whereas in D&D the monster just sorta...stops after being stabbed enough times.


Well, that's all in the narration. Breaking into parts that still advance is when it becomes bloodied. Blam.

Though personally aside from the excellent counterpoints raised in this thread, I'd also like to add that "Hey, we're going up against a lich, Rogue, play with this red ball for the next six sessions, we'll call you when we need a lock picked" is the antithesis of fun.

Zammm = Batman.

It's my sig in a box
58280208 wrote:
Everything is better when you read it in Bane's voice.
192334281 wrote:
Your human antics and desire to continue living have moved me. Just kidding. You cannot move me physically or emotionally. Wall humor.
57092228 wrote:
Copy effects work like a photocopy machine: you get a copy of the 'naked' card, NOT of what's on it.
56995928 wrote:
Funny story: InQuest Magazine (I think it was InQuest) had an oversized Chaos Orb which I totally rooked someone into allowing into a (non-sanctioned) game. I had a proxy card that was a Mountain with "Chaos Orb" written on it. When I played it, my opponent cried foul: Him: "WTF? a Proxy? no-one said anything about Proxies. Do you even own an actual Chaos Orb?" Me: "Yes, but I thought it would be better to use a Proxy." Him: "No way. If you're going to put a Chaos Orb in your deck you have to use your actual Chaos Orb." Me: "*Sigh*. Okay." I pulled out this huge Chaos Orb and placed it on the table. He tried to cry foul again but everyone else said he insisted I use my actual Chaos Orb and that was my actual Chaos Orb. I used it, flipped it and wiped most of his board. Unsurprisingly, that only worked once and only because everyone present thought it was hilarious.
My DM on Battleminds:
no, see i can kill defenders, but 8 consecutive crits on a battlemind, eh walk it off.
144543765 wrote:
195392035 wrote:
Hi guys! So, I'm a sort of returning player to Magic. I say sort of because as a child I had two main TCG's I liked. Yu-Gi-Oh, and Pokemon. Some of my friends branched off in to Magic, and I bought two pre-made decks just to kind of fit in. Like I said, Yu-Gi-Oh and Pokemon were what I really knew how to play. I have a extensive knowledge of deck building in those two TCG's. However, as far as Magic is concerned, I only ever used those two pre made decks. I know how the game is played, and I know general things, but now I want to get in the game for real. I want to begin playing it as a regular. My question is, are all cards ever released from the time of the inception of this game until present day fair game in a deck? Or are there special rules? Are some cards forbidden or restricted? Thanks guys, and I will gladly accept ANY help lol.
I have the same problem with women.
117639611 wrote:
198869283 wrote:
Oh I have a standing rule. If someone plays a Planeswalker I concede the game. I refuse to play with or against people who play Planeswalkers. They really did ruin the game.
A turn two Tibalt win?! Wicked... Betcha don't see that everyday.

The Pony Co. 

Is this my new ego sig? Yes it is, other Barry
57461258 wrote:
And that's why you should never, ever call RP Jesus on being a troll, because then everyone else playing along gets outed, too, and the thread goes back to being boring.
57461258 wrote:
See, this is why RPJesus should be in charge of the storyline. The novel line would never have been cancelled if he had been running the show. Specifically the Slobad and Geth's Head talkshow he just described.
57461258 wrote:
Not only was that an obligatory joke, it was an on-topic post that still managed to be off-topic due to thread derailment. RP Jesus does it again folks.
92481331 wrote:
I think I'm gonna' start praying to Jesus... That's right, RPJesus, I'm gonna' be praying to you, right now. O' Jesus Please continue to make my time here on the forums fun and cause me to chuckle. Amen.
92481331 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
It was wonderful. Us Johnnies had a field day. That Timmy with the Grizzly bears would actually have to think about swinging into your Mogg Fanatic, giving you time to set up your silly combo. Nowadays it's all DERPSWING! with thier blue jeans and their MP3 players and their EM EM OH AR PEE JEES and their "Dewmocracy" and their children's card games and their Jersey Shores and their Tattooed Tenaged Vampire Hunters from Beverly Hills
Seriously, that was amazing. I laughed my *ss off. Made my day, and I just woke up.
[quote=ArtVenn You're still one of my favorite people... just sayin'.[/quote]
56756068 wrote:
56786788 wrote:
.....would it be a bit blasphemous if I said, "PRAYSE RPJAYSUS!" like an Evangelical preacher?
Perhaps, but who doesn't like to blaspheme every now and again? Especially when Mr. RPJesus is completely right.
56756068 wrote:
I don't say this often, but ... LOL
57526128 wrote:
You... You... Evil something... I actualy made the damn char once I saw the poster... Now you made me see it again and I gained resolve to put it into my campaign. Shell be high standing oficial of Cyrix order. Uterly mad and only slightly evil. And it'll be bad. Evil even. And ill blame you and Lizard for it :P.
57042968 wrote:
111809331 wrote:
I'm trying to work out if you're being sarcastic here. ...
Am going to stop you right there... it's RPJesus... he's always sarcastic
58335208 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
112114441 wrote:
we can only hope it gets the jace treatment...it could have at least been legendary
So that even the decks that don't run it run it to deal with it? Isn't that like the definition of format warping?
I lol'd.
56287226 wrote:
98088088 wrote:
Uktabi Orangutan What the heck's going on with those monkeys?
The most common answer is that they are what RPJesus would call "[Debutantes avert your eyes]ing."
56965458 wrote:
Show
57461258 wrote:
116498949 wrote:
I’ve removed content from this thread because off-topic discussions are a violation of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code here: www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_... Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively. If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the “Report Post” button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.
...Am I the only one that thinks this is reaching the point of downright Kafkaesque insanity?
I condone the use of the word Kafkaesque. However, I'm presentely ambivalent. I mean, that can't be serious, right? We're April 1st, right? They didn't mod RPJesus for off-topic discussion when the WHOLE THREAD IS OFF-TOPIC, right? Right.
57545908 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
Save or die. If you disagree with this, you're wrong (Not because of any points or arguements that have been made, but I just rolled a d20 for you and got a 1, so you lose).
58397368 wrote:
58222628 wrote:
This just won the argument, AFAIC.
That's just awesome.
57471038 wrote:
57718868 wrote:
HOW DID I NOT KNOW ABOUT THE BEAR PRODUCING WORDS OF WILDING?! WHAT IS WRONG WITH ME?!
That's what RPJesus tends to do. That's why I don't think he's a real person, but some Magic Card Archive Server sort of machine, that is programmed to react to other posters' comments with obscure cards that do in fact exist, but somehow missed by even the most experienced Magic players. And then come up with strange combos with said cards. All of that is impossible for a normal human to do given the amount of time he does it and how often he does it. He/It got me with Light of Sanction, which prompted me to go to RQ&A to try and find if it was even possible to do combat damage to a creature I control (in light that Mark of Asylum exists).
71235715 wrote:
+10
100176878 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
57078538 wrote:
heaven or hell.
Round 1. Lets rock.
GG quotes! RPJesus just made this thread win!
56906968 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
143359585 wrote:
Blue players get all the overpowerered cards like JTMS. I think it's time that wizards gave something to people who remember what magic is really about: creatures.
Initially yes, Wizards was married to blue. However, about a decade ago they had a nasty divorce, and a few years after that they began courting the attention of Green. Then in Worldwake they had a nasty affair with their ex, but as of Innistrad, things seem to have gotten back on track, and Wizards has even proposed.
You are my favorite. Yes you. And moments like this make it so. Thank you RPJesus for just being you.
On what flavor text fits me:
57307308 wrote:
Surely RPJesus gets Niv-Mizzet, Dracogenius?
56874518 wrote:
First: I STILL can't take you seriously with that avatar. And I can take RPJesus seriously, so that's saying something.
121689989 wrote:
I'd offer you a cookie for making me laugh but it has an Upkeep Cost that has been known to cause people to quit eating.
56267956 wrote:
I <3 you loads
57400888 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
"AINT NO LAWS IN THE SKY MOTHER****." - Agrus Kos, Wojek Veteran
10/10. Amazing.
I agree it is weird to chop fire elementals for HP damage. Looking back at the 1e Monster Manual(p.38), it took a +2 or better weapon to harm them.  It was like the magic of the sword disrupted the elemental sending back to its plane of origin.  The elementals were bad-ass and overall were rarely encountered; hence the frequency of Very Rare. Yes, completely unrealistic but when your in the moment it felt almost real. Good stuff!
Don't get me wrong. I'm not a 4e hater. I like 4e enough that I am a D&D Insider subscriber. There is just one thing about the game that I really, really hate.

Forced balance.

If a rogue goes up behind a skeleton and sneak attacks them, they get to do extra damage. This makes me mad. The Sneak Attack power represents stabbing vital bits. The skeleton has no vital bits.

If a wizard wants to blast a fire elemental with a fireball, it works just fine. Fire elemental have no fire resistance. I think I remember a developer saying this was intentional.

I understand there things make the game more fair, but at what cost to realism? I'm not saying D&D should be pure simulation, I just think the developers went too far in making a balanced game. This needs to be fixed in 5e.



I agree.  And it goes even further than monster properties.  The way many powers work just doesn't make any sense.  Apart from mere tactical balance, you'd be hard pressed to find a decent explanation why some powers are at-will, and others encounters or dailies.  The unified system also reduces the way classes are supposed to "feel" differently.  A wizard, for example, no longer feels vastly different from a fighter.  They simply have powers that produce a somewhat different effect, but otherwise work pretty much the same way (not saying that the old magic system was the way to go, though).
I can't speak for other people but when I play not only does the wizard still feel distinct from the fighter, but the non-casters finally all feel distinct from each other.

I mean the argument at it's most basic could state that clerics and wizards in pre-4e edition all feel the same for the same reasons fighters and wizards don't.  I assume you don't hold that opinion?
the 1/2 level add... they simplified the system in good ways only to complicate it again. I do not want to feel forced to use a computer to calculate my character at any level (3e wasnt much better in this regard but at leased your not erasing your skill bonus on every skill every other level)
Who says that a skeleton doesnt havea vulnerable bit?  perhaps the animated skeleton has a magical thiny powering it and the rogue attacks it?

It doesn't even have to be that complicated. A skeleton has joints. Joints are weak points. Attacking joints inhibits movement. Attacking a skeleton's shoulders, spine, knees, or hips is going to be more damaging to it than attacking its ribcage or skull.



More damaging or more inhibiting?  I would argue that damaging a skeleton requires fracturing the bones or knocking them clean away, both of which require brute force and not the relatively weak (in terms of applied muscle power) precision strike that is a sneak attack.

I agree.  And it goes even further than monster properties.  The way many powers work just doesn't make any sense.  Apart from mere tactical balance, you'd be hard pressed to find a decent explanation why some powers are at-will, and others encounters or dailies.  The unified system also reduces the way classes are supposed to "feel" differently.  A wizard, for example, no longer feels vastly different from a fighter.  They simply have powers that produce a somewhat different effect, but otherwise work pretty much the same way (not saying that the old magic system was the way to go, though).



Hard pressed my foot, it's spelled out plainly in the PHB!

Show

At-Will Powers
You can use your at-will powers as often as you want.
They represent easy weapon swings or simple magical
effects that don’t put any unusual strain on you or tax
your resources in any way.

Encounter Powers
An encounter power can be used once per encounter.
You need to take a short rest (page 263) before you can
use one again. Encounter powers produce more powerful,
more dramatic effects than at-will powers. If you’re
a martial character, they are exploits you’ve practiced
extensively but can pull off only once in a while. If
you’re an arcane or divine character, these are spells or
prayers of such power that they take time to re-form in
your mind after you unleash their magic energy.

Daily Powers
A daily power can be used once per day. Daily powers
are the most powerful effects you can produce, and using
one takes a significant toll on your physical and mental
resources. If you’re a martial character, you’re reaching
into your deepest reserves of energy to pull off an amazing
exploit. If you’re an arcane magic-user, you’re reciting
a spell of such complexity that your mind can only hold it
in place for so long, and once it’s recited, it’s wiped from
your memory. If you’re a divine character, the divine
might that you channel to invoke these powers is so
strong that you can harness it only once a day.
Daily powers usually include an effect that takes
place regardless of whether the power is used successfully.
As a result, these limited resources are at least
slightly beneficial every time you use them. Once you
use a daily power, you need to take an extended rest
(page 263) before you can use it again.

 

Play whatever the **** you want. Never Point a loaded party at a plot you are not willing to shoot. Arcane Rhetoric. My Blog.

If a rogue goes up behind a skeleton and sneak attacks them, they get to do extra damage. This makes me mad. The Sneak Attack power represents stabbing vital bits. The skeleton has no vital bits.



Actually, "stabbing vital bits" is more akin to ONE of the descriptions of a Critical Hit (the other being you just nailed it with the sweet dpot of your axe/sword/pick).

Sneak attack is more akin to being able to avoid the monsters notice/defenses (hence combat advantage) and make a more precise strike that does more damage. Instead of chipping bone you're able to actually slash at the connective "tissue".

I like 4e a lot but combat simply takes too long - lower HP for monsters would speed things up a lot.  I feel that a solid hit with a greatsword  or battleaxe should be enough to take down your average 1st level non-minion kobold or goblin. 

My other beef is with skill challenges which seem contrived and forced not to mention mind-numbingly dull.  Too much reliance on structured die-rolling at the expense of simply role-playing through social encounters seems unnecessary (skill checks are fine but the formal skill challenge seems like overkill.)
More damaging or more inhibiting?

Those are the same thing. Welcome to the abstraction that is the HP system. Seriously, it's been this way for quite a while.

Why, yes, as a matter of fact I am the Unfailing Arbiter of All That Is Good Design (Even More So Than The Actual Developers) TM Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further. Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!

I agree.  And it goes even further than monster properties.  The way many powers work just doesn't make any sense.  Apart from mere tactical balance, you'd be hard pressed to find a decent explanation why some powers are at-will, and others encounters or dailies.  The unified system also reduces the way classes are supposed to "feel" differently.  A wizard, for example, no longer feels vastly different from a fighter.  They simply have powers that produce a somewhat different effect, but otherwise work pretty much the same way (not saying that the old magic system was the way to go, though).



Hard pressed my foot, it's spelled out plainly in the PHB!

Show

At-Will Powers
You can use your at-will powers as often as you want.
They represent easy weapon swings or simple magical
effects that don’t put any unusual strain on you or tax
your resources in any way.

Encounter Powers
An encounter power can be used once per encounter.
You need to take a short rest (page 263) before you can
use one again. Encounter powers produce more powerful,
more dramatic effects than at-will powers. If you’re
a martial character, they are exploits you’ve practiced
extensively but can pull off only once in a while. If
you’re an arcane or divine character, these are spells or
prayers of such power that they take time to re-form in
your mind after you unleash their magic energy.

Daily Powers
A daily power can be used once per day. Daily powers
are the most powerful effects you can produce, and using
one takes a significant toll on your physical and mental
resources. If you’re a martial character, you’re reaching
into your deepest reserves of energy to pull off an amazing
exploit. If you’re an arcane magic-user, you’re reciting
a spell of such complexity that your mind can only hold it
in place for so long, and once it’s recited, it’s wiped from
your memory. If you’re a divine character, the divine
might that you channel to invoke these powers is so
strong that you can harness it only once a day.
Daily powers usually include an effect that takes
place regardless of whether the power is used successfully.
As a result, these limited resources are at least
slightly beneficial every time you use them. Once you
use a daily power, you need to take an extended rest
(page 263) before you can use it again.

 


I still like the explanation that D&D games are actually stories being told after the fact. So things like dailies and supersuperhuman feats are just a way of adding dramatic embellishment.

Zammm = Batman.

It's my sig in a box
58280208 wrote:
Everything is better when you read it in Bane's voice.
192334281 wrote:
Your human antics and desire to continue living have moved me. Just kidding. You cannot move me physically or emotionally. Wall humor.
57092228 wrote:
Copy effects work like a photocopy machine: you get a copy of the 'naked' card, NOT of what's on it.
56995928 wrote:
Funny story: InQuest Magazine (I think it was InQuest) had an oversized Chaos Orb which I totally rooked someone into allowing into a (non-sanctioned) game. I had a proxy card that was a Mountain with "Chaos Orb" written on it. When I played it, my opponent cried foul: Him: "WTF? a Proxy? no-one said anything about Proxies. Do you even own an actual Chaos Orb?" Me: "Yes, but I thought it would be better to use a Proxy." Him: "No way. If you're going to put a Chaos Orb in your deck you have to use your actual Chaos Orb." Me: "*Sigh*. Okay." I pulled out this huge Chaos Orb and placed it on the table. He tried to cry foul again but everyone else said he insisted I use my actual Chaos Orb and that was my actual Chaos Orb. I used it, flipped it and wiped most of his board. Unsurprisingly, that only worked once and only because everyone present thought it was hilarious.
My DM on Battleminds:
no, see i can kill defenders, but 8 consecutive crits on a battlemind, eh walk it off.
144543765 wrote:
195392035 wrote:
Hi guys! So, I'm a sort of returning player to Magic. I say sort of because as a child I had two main TCG's I liked. Yu-Gi-Oh, and Pokemon. Some of my friends branched off in to Magic, and I bought two pre-made decks just to kind of fit in. Like I said, Yu-Gi-Oh and Pokemon were what I really knew how to play. I have a extensive knowledge of deck building in those two TCG's. However, as far as Magic is concerned, I only ever used those two pre made decks. I know how the game is played, and I know general things, but now I want to get in the game for real. I want to begin playing it as a regular. My question is, are all cards ever released from the time of the inception of this game until present day fair game in a deck? Or are there special rules? Are some cards forbidden or restricted? Thanks guys, and I will gladly accept ANY help lol.
I have the same problem with women.
117639611 wrote:
198869283 wrote:
Oh I have a standing rule. If someone plays a Planeswalker I concede the game. I refuse to play with or against people who play Planeswalkers. They really did ruin the game.
A turn two Tibalt win?! Wicked... Betcha don't see that everyday.

The Pony Co. 

Is this my new ego sig? Yes it is, other Barry
57461258 wrote:
And that's why you should never, ever call RP Jesus on being a troll, because then everyone else playing along gets outed, too, and the thread goes back to being boring.
57461258 wrote:
See, this is why RPJesus should be in charge of the storyline. The novel line would never have been cancelled if he had been running the show. Specifically the Slobad and Geth's Head talkshow he just described.
57461258 wrote:
Not only was that an obligatory joke, it was an on-topic post that still managed to be off-topic due to thread derailment. RP Jesus does it again folks.
92481331 wrote:
I think I'm gonna' start praying to Jesus... That's right, RPJesus, I'm gonna' be praying to you, right now. O' Jesus Please continue to make my time here on the forums fun and cause me to chuckle. Amen.
92481331 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
It was wonderful. Us Johnnies had a field day. That Timmy with the Grizzly bears would actually have to think about swinging into your Mogg Fanatic, giving you time to set up your silly combo. Nowadays it's all DERPSWING! with thier blue jeans and their MP3 players and their EM EM OH AR PEE JEES and their "Dewmocracy" and their children's card games and their Jersey Shores and their Tattooed Tenaged Vampire Hunters from Beverly Hills
Seriously, that was amazing. I laughed my *ss off. Made my day, and I just woke up.
[quote=ArtVenn You're still one of my favorite people... just sayin'.[/quote]
56756068 wrote:
56786788 wrote:
.....would it be a bit blasphemous if I said, "PRAYSE RPJAYSUS!" like an Evangelical preacher?
Perhaps, but who doesn't like to blaspheme every now and again? Especially when Mr. RPJesus is completely right.
56756068 wrote:
I don't say this often, but ... LOL
57526128 wrote:
You... You... Evil something... I actualy made the damn char once I saw the poster... Now you made me see it again and I gained resolve to put it into my campaign. Shell be high standing oficial of Cyrix order. Uterly mad and only slightly evil. And it'll be bad. Evil even. And ill blame you and Lizard for it :P.
57042968 wrote:
111809331 wrote:
I'm trying to work out if you're being sarcastic here. ...
Am going to stop you right there... it's RPJesus... he's always sarcastic
58335208 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
112114441 wrote:
we can only hope it gets the jace treatment...it could have at least been legendary
So that even the decks that don't run it run it to deal with it? Isn't that like the definition of format warping?
I lol'd.
56287226 wrote:
98088088 wrote:
Uktabi Orangutan What the heck's going on with those monkeys?
The most common answer is that they are what RPJesus would call "[Debutantes avert your eyes]ing."
56965458 wrote:
Show
57461258 wrote:
116498949 wrote:
I’ve removed content from this thread because off-topic discussions are a violation of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code here: www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_... Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively. If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the “Report Post” button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.
...Am I the only one that thinks this is reaching the point of downright Kafkaesque insanity?
I condone the use of the word Kafkaesque. However, I'm presentely ambivalent. I mean, that can't be serious, right? We're April 1st, right? They didn't mod RPJesus for off-topic discussion when the WHOLE THREAD IS OFF-TOPIC, right? Right.
57545908 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
Save or die. If you disagree with this, you're wrong (Not because of any points or arguements that have been made, but I just rolled a d20 for you and got a 1, so you lose).
58397368 wrote:
58222628 wrote:
This just won the argument, AFAIC.
That's just awesome.
57471038 wrote:
57718868 wrote:
HOW DID I NOT KNOW ABOUT THE BEAR PRODUCING WORDS OF WILDING?! WHAT IS WRONG WITH ME?!
That's what RPJesus tends to do. That's why I don't think he's a real person, but some Magic Card Archive Server sort of machine, that is programmed to react to other posters' comments with obscure cards that do in fact exist, but somehow missed by even the most experienced Magic players. And then come up with strange combos with said cards. All of that is impossible for a normal human to do given the amount of time he does it and how often he does it. He/It got me with Light of Sanction, which prompted me to go to RQ&A to try and find if it was even possible to do combat damage to a creature I control (in light that Mark of Asylum exists).
71235715 wrote:
+10
100176878 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
57078538 wrote:
heaven or hell.
Round 1. Lets rock.
GG quotes! RPJesus just made this thread win!
56906968 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
143359585 wrote:
Blue players get all the overpowerered cards like JTMS. I think it's time that wizards gave something to people who remember what magic is really about: creatures.
Initially yes, Wizards was married to blue. However, about a decade ago they had a nasty divorce, and a few years after that they began courting the attention of Green. Then in Worldwake they had a nasty affair with their ex, but as of Innistrad, things seem to have gotten back on track, and Wizards has even proposed.
You are my favorite. Yes you. And moments like this make it so. Thank you RPJesus for just being you.
On what flavor text fits me:
57307308 wrote:
Surely RPJesus gets Niv-Mizzet, Dracogenius?
56874518 wrote:
First: I STILL can't take you seriously with that avatar. And I can take RPJesus seriously, so that's saying something.
121689989 wrote:
I'd offer you a cookie for making me laugh but it has an Upkeep Cost that has been known to cause people to quit eating.
56267956 wrote:
I <3 you loads
57400888 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
"AINT NO LAWS IN THE SKY MOTHER****." - Agrus Kos, Wojek Veteran
10/10. Amazing.

I still like the explanation that D&D games are actually stories being told after the fact. So things like dailies and supersuperhuman feats are just a way of adding dramatic embellishment.



that works too.

I think the issue is not that the system doesnt provide ample explanation for its meta concepts its just that some people just dont like it.  Thats fine, just not the system's fault.

Pepsi isnt at fault when i say i like Coke better.  it's still cola in its own respects. 

Play whatever the **** you want. Never Point a loaded party at a plot you are not willing to shoot. Arcane Rhetoric. My Blog.


I agree.  And it goes even further than monster properties.  The way many powers work just doesn't make any sense.  Apart from mere tactical balance, you'd be hard pressed to find a decent explanation why some powers are at-will, and others encounters or dailies.  The unified system also reduces the way classes are supposed to "feel" differently.  A wizard, for example, no longer feels vastly different from a fighter.  They simply have powers that produce a somewhat different effect, but otherwise work pretty much the same way (not saying that the old magic system was the way to go, though).



Hard pressed my foot, it's spelled out plainly in the PHB!



The text in the PHB is not an explanation.  It is an attempt to explain away the distinction they made between power types.  Let me clarify with an example:

A fighter is capable of Cleaving all day long with his two-hander.  He rips through one belly and has enough momentum left to hit the one next to it.  All day long.  With a huge sword.  Even better, he can go for Tide of Iron as well, pushing with such force that even a frickin' ogre would stumble backwards.  Again, all day long.  A million times in a row if he wants to.

Yet, if he tries Brute Force just once and hits one opponent with an extra powerful blow, he suddenly gets tired and has to sleep before he can do that again.

Sorry, but that sounds like a big pile of horse crap to me.  It is clear they divided powers into at-wills, encounters, and dailies because of tactical balance, and then invented an explanation about fatigue and such to camouflage that it really doesn't make sense
What realism? I have no idea how a skeleton works and no reason to believe it doesn't have 'vital bits'. Same thing with a fire elemental. Humans are 98% water but water still kills us if we're dropped into it. Again, we have no idea how a fire elemental 'works', thus 'realism' is a meaningless concept here. You have expectations, which is fine, but where did those come from? Playing 3.5? I'll note that 1e AD&D elementals didn't have resistances to damage types. Neither were skeletons immune to sneak attack damage.



98% water, really?

I guess someone should tell the army that they would be better off using water guns then those normal metal ones then.

Member of the Axis of Awesome

Show
Homogenising: Making vanilla in 31 different colours
More damaging or more inhibiting?

Those are the same thing.



No they're not.  Paralyzing an opponent will not kill it.  Damaging an opponent will.  In fact, most RPGs even have rules specific for non-damaging combat (wrestling, grappling) with the express intent to just inhibit and not damage an opponent.


The text in the PHB is not an explanation.  It is an attempt to explain away the distinction they made between power types.  Let me clarify with an example:



What?  Its not an explanation but rather and attempt to explain?

I think the issue here is just that you cant accept the explanation but are shifting the blame to the text itself and away fro myour own personal preferances.

To answer your other questions, yes, I am perfectly fine with a fighter having an ability that he can only do once per extended rest.  I can see it for what it is trying to be.

The fighter isnt just doing that one move once a day because thats the only time he is doing it, he is only doing those moves because of the physical toll, the timing of things and the circumstances of the fight itself.  it could be one of those reasons or it could be all of those reasons at once.

when i describe my fighter if he trying to kill a creature he isnt just holding back the entire time, each attack is trying to kill the creature, each blow is trying tomanuver into a better position for a strike, each moment he is looking to pull off that brute stirke.

 

Play whatever the **** you want. Never Point a loaded party at a plot you are not willing to shoot. Arcane Rhetoric. My Blog.

I am always hesitent to use other media or RL for trying to explain in game activities but lets take the karate kid 2...

Why isnt Daniel always using the crane kick?  according to Mr. Miyag "If do right, no can defense."
Shouldnt Daniel be using that attack every single fight to always win? 

Play whatever the **** you want. Never Point a loaded party at a plot you are not willing to shoot. Arcane Rhetoric. My Blog.

No they're not.

Yes, they are, at least in the context that I was discussing. If you want to split hairs, then I can't stop you from thinking whatever it is that you think, but remember that this is a fantasy game. We need abstractions like this or else it will stop being fun, especially for newbies.

Paralyzing an opponent will not kill it.  Damaging an opponent will.

I'm not talking about paralyzing it. I'm talking about damaging it in an area that is particularly vunlerable to its structure. If I crush a skeleton's ribcage, that's one thing, but if I crush its pelvis, its structure and ability to function are weakened. If I stab a human's arm with my sword, that's one thing, but if I stab that human's heart, its ability to function is weakened. This is the same thing.

Why, yes, as a matter of fact I am the Unfailing Arbiter of All That Is Good Design (Even More So Than The Actual Developers) TM Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further. Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!


The text in the PHB is not an explanation.  It is an attempt to explain away the distinction they made between power types.  Let me clarify with an example:



What?  Its not an explanation but rather and attempt to explain?

I think the issue here is just that you cant accept the explanation but are shifting the blame to the text itself and away fro myour own personal preferances.



My example illustrates that that is not the case.

To answer your other questions, yes, I am perfectly fine with a fighter having an ability that he can only do once per extended rest.  I can see it for what it is trying to be.

The fighter isnt just doing that one move once a day because thats the only time he is doing it, he is only doing those moves because of the physical toll, the timing of things and the circumstances of the fight itself.  it could be one of those reasons or it could be all of those reasons at once.



Again, it makes no sense that the physical toll of one bone-crushing blow is greater than that of swinging a heavy piece of metal a million times.  And I would even argue that timing could be more of an issue when trying to cleave or when pushing an ogre back with your shield (you probably need to get him off balance AND avoid his own attacks to get close enough).

when i describe my fighter if he trying to kill a creature he isnt just holding back the entire time, each attack is trying to kill the creature, each blow is trying tomanuver into a better position for a strike, each moment he is looking to pull off that brute stirke.



And the moment he does pull off that brute strike, he suddenly gets tired but still manages to push ogres back a hundred times in a row.

Sorry, I just don't see it.

I am always hesitent to use other media or RL for trying to explain in game activities but lets take the karate kid 2...

Why isnt Daniel always using the crane kick?  according to Mr. Miyag "If do right, no can defense."
Shouldnt Daniel be using that attack every single fight to always win? 



Because then he becomes predictable.  An issue he would not have when facing another opponent who did not see the move before.  I'm sure he would be able to pull it off several times per day that way.


And the moment he does pull off that brute strike, he suddenly gets tired but still manages to push ogres back a hundred times in a row.

Sorry, I just don't see it.




Ill reply with if your fighter is having the opportunity of using his at will power 100 times before the next extended rest then you must be fighting something not worth it to put so little tax on your other resources.

I dont see the fighter doing 100 at will attacks over the course of 10 encounters let alone the normal 4-6 that seems to be the standard.  

Your arguement is one based on theoretical extremes. 

Play whatever the **** you want. Never Point a loaded party at a plot you are not willing to shoot. Arcane Rhetoric. My Blog.

D&D has had daily martial powers for awhile.  3e had a ton of them, and I recall a few kits in 2e having them too.  Maybe 1e had them as well?  My memory on 1e isn't so grand.
No they're not.

Yes, they are, at least in the context that I was discussing. If you want to split hairs, then I can't stop you from thinking whatever it is that you think, but remember that this is a fantasy game. We need abstractions like this or else it will stop being fun, especially for newbies.



And I don't see how the simple concept that skeletons cannot be backstabbed would endanger that.  Otherwise, old DnD games would have been in serious trouble.  We all were newbies once.

Paralyzing an opponent will not kill it.  Damaging an opponent will.

I'm not talking about paralyzing it. I'm talking about damaging it in an area that is particularly vunlerable to its structure. If I crush a skeleton's ribcage, that's one thing, but if I crush its pelvis, its structure and ability to function are weakened. If I stab a human's arm with my sword, that's one thing, but if I stab that human's heart, its ability to function is weakened. This is the same thing.


Hold on, you said "Attacking joints inhibits movement".  That's inhibiting, not damaging.  And they are not the same thing.  You can't kill a person merely by putting handcuffs on.  You need to cause actual damage.  In the case of a skeletonm that would be anything that hits hard enough to splinter bones or tear them away.  Backstabbing is too weak-powered for that, as it relies on precision rather than brute force.
D&D has had daily martial powers for awhile.  3e had a ton of them, and I recall a few kits in 2e having them too.  Maybe 1e had them as well?  My memory on 1e isn't so grand.



They did, and not just martial powers - they had powers like that for paladin, druid, and bard.

They also had weekly powers, 3/day powers, and other variations of it.

These have been pointed out in a different thread that basically went down the same discussion.  

Here is the BIG issue:

People are looking for a realistic explanation of why certain things happen with martial characters - even though these martial characters live in a fantastic world of flying eyeballs and lizards, despite all the magic flying around and gods smiting foes at the beacon from priests.  Despite people taking sword hit after sword hit in battle.

For some reason they just can't allow a martial character to be limited in such a fashion.  Their desire for that one element to be "realistic" is their barrier.

It also hurts them because they overall prefer a "simulationist" experience, where 4e strives to provide a "cinematic" one.  You very rarely see heroes in movies using their best attacks over and over and over again.   
Welcome to ZomboniLand - My D&D Blog http://zomboniland.blogspot.com/
Who says that a skeleton doesnt havea vulnerable bit?  perhaps the animated skeleton has a magical thiny powering it and the rogue attacks it?

It doesn't even have to be that complicated. A skeleton has joints. Joints are weak points. Attacking joints inhibits movement. Attacking a skeleton's shoulders, spine, knees, or hips is going to be more damaging to it than attacking its ribcage or skull.



More damaging or more inhibiting?  I would argue that damaging a skeleton requires fracturing the bones or knocking them clean away, both of which require brute force and not the relatively weak (in terms of applied muscle power) precision strike that is a sneak attack.




Just as a side note - you do understand that even since the 1e days of D&D, Hit Points was an abstraction, and did not actually represent "physical harm", this is a result of things getting more "hit points" as they went up in level.  

I mean, a 5th level wizard with a constitution of 12 didn't get any healthier - so why is it he can get stabbed in the face 5 times more than he could at level 1?   
Welcome to ZomboniLand - My D&D Blog http://zomboniland.blogspot.com/
And a whole discussion about making a players class less fun. It really does seem the 3(.5) fans preferred the rules lawyering rather than everyone at the table having fun.

I wonder how many players these people have cycled through their groups and some left as it wasn't fun being the little guy any more. 
My thoughts on what works and what doesn't in D&D and how D&D Next may benefit are detailed on my blog, Vorpal Thoughts.
And I don't see how the simple concept that skeletons cannot be backstabbed would endanger that.

Why add in an immunity that makes no sense? It just screws over particular characters for no other reason than screwing over particulat characters.

Hold on, you said "Attacking joints inhibits movement".  That's inhibiting, not damaging.

You can keep saying over and over again that they're not the same thing, but they are. I don't know why you don't see that.

You can't kill a person merely by putting handcuffs on.

No, but if putting handcuffs on them stops them from being able to anything at all in combat, then they're HP has effectively gone down to 0.

You need to cause actual damage.  In the case of a skeletonm that would be anything that hits hard enough to splinter bones or tear them away.  Backstabbing is too weak-powered for that, as it relies on precision rather than brute force.

That's ridiculous. Just because something is "weak-powered" doesn't mean that it doesn't do a lot of damage. Think of it like opening a door. The door starts as an obstacle, closed at 100 HP, and you want to make it stop being an obstable, open at 0 HP. You could put a bunch of power into punching it over and over again to try to forcable push it open, or you could just read the sign that says "pull" and do that instead and remove the obstacle much more efficiently and with much less effort.

Why, yes, as a matter of fact I am the Unfailing Arbiter of All That Is Good Design (Even More So Than The Actual Developers) TM Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further. Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
Sign In to post comments