Community

May 1, 2012 -- 12:59PM, autolycus wrote:

May 1, 2012 -- 11:29AM, AbdulAlhazred wrote:

No, you just haven't really looked at the system and understood it IMHO.

From straw man to ad hominem. I suppose I should expect this.

It's not ad hominem to state that a claim that you make is factually incorrect.

The claim, for reference, was:  "Armor is just paper doll coverings with the mechanics of the game making them largely irrelevant except for enchantments. If the choice of armor type is irrelevant, as it is in 4th ed, "

That is a factually incorrect statement that demonstrates a significant lack of understanding of 4e as a system.  That's not ad hominem.

Apparently then, armor type is only relevant when the best AC is attainable solely by means of wearing a particular armor type. If other armor types can achieve the same AC by totally different means, then it's all cosmetic.

Which is ridiculous. The fact that two similar means have the same end does not make them identical, especially when "the same end" is myopically focused on a single number, not on the cost it takes to reach that number nor on any other benefits that may accrue from pursuing different means to a high AC.

May 1, 2012 -- 1:36PM, Mand12 wrote:

That you think calling you out on your factual error is ad hominem is more troubling.  Especially when you subsequently show that you didn't even know you were making the error, which makes the statement that you appear to not understand the system demonstrably, factually correct.

Dude, this is a D&D website. Every wild assertion is backed up by, "That's my experience - are you gonna call me a liar? Also, your mother was a strawman and I've been playing RPGs since people actually *wore* chainmail rather than playing Chainmail."

May 1, 2012 -- 12:59PM, autolycus wrote:

..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />Where is the 4e dodge skill for a fighter? Parry? All I see is Armor Class, which is determined from a series of stats. It's all just special effects, much like the game Champions where you can describe a blast as a fire beam or a laser or a cosmic ray...

As in EVERY other edition of D&D everything to do with how hard you are to hit is pretty much rolled up into one number, AC. Its an abstraction. That doesn't mean that AC is the only effect of armor. Of course all the numbers in D&D are pretty much like this. HP are rolled up from any number of things into an abstraction, so is your attack bonus, etc. The exact details have varied from one edition to another, but if you're making a general criticism of abstractions in D&D then that's fine, but saying so would be helpful. If not, then I am unsure why you are having problems with this one abstraction and what this has to do with the way 4e was designed when it is the same in all editions.

As for swapping your stat, I don't know of any way to do that except to have one of a couple specific classes like warden that have that as a class feature.

3rd edition stuff. But with the plethora of books for that edition it would be hard to find something that wasn't there.

Sorry, are we talking about the same thing here? I was talking about 4e. I don't know what exactly you can do in 3e and I'm not really interested in finding out. If you're saying something like "5e shouldn't let you swap stats that give an AC bonus" well, that's a question that can be discussed. I don't recall anything like that factoring into my comments so far, so it doesn't seem relevant to me. I'm happy to have that discussion if you want.

No. I'm not looking for realism, just narrative consistency. But realism exists in D&D. It always has. The only question is how much to throw in. People eat and drink in D&D. They have jobs. Weapons cause damage when they strike people. Departures happen when you start to add the gaming elements. Where to draw the line between realism and gameplay is a subject that has led to the vast number of games in the market.

I'm suggesting that in order for a game to be playable it requires abstractions. Many of those abstractions obscure subtle or simply tedious or inconvenient distinctions between things. Lets use an example. It is fatiguing to wear heavy armor and such armor is uncomfortable and hot. These would be disadvantages of wearing plate armor which might realistically drive some people to wear say hide armor. These are also things that are hard to represent in the abstractions of an RPG. Some of them like fatigue COULD be represented, but require extra tracking and adding a fatigue mechanism, which then has to be accounted for in lots of other places to be logically consistent. The fact that armor is hot and uncomfortable could probably in theory also be accounted for in some way, again adding additional rules and tracking which also requires accounting for in other places.

As for narrative, where's the issue? The plate armored guy tanks his way through things, and his successful defenses are narrated as blows glancing off his heavy armor as he simply pushes forward, pressing his opponents hard until they go down. The light armored guy dodges and feints, avoiding and turning deadly blows away from his weaker armor. If the two types of character meet in combat then the issue is in doubt. Will the quick guy outmaneuver the slow armored guy? Maybe, maybe not. Either result can be narrated just as easily as the other.

Ease of narration isn't an issue. Consistency is, as I've already explained.

What consistency issue exists? I don't see one. Lightly armored people are more agile and they can anticipate their enemies and/or dodge them, making them a bit harder to hit if they have good INT/DEX, which is reflected in their AC. Heavy armored people are less agile and don't get that advantage. If your issue is a high DEX guy in plate armor is no harder to hit than a low DEX one, well, that is just a way of reflecting that loss of agility, is it not? Where is the inconsistency? Note too that heavy armor also gives you a penalty to most physical skills, which means said guy in plate will jump, swim, etc less effectively. We could of course argue about whether reflex defense should be reduced too, and whether say being grappled should negate your DEX bonus, etc etc etc. In the interest of playability 4e doesn't do that. IMHO it isn't a huge big deal. Grappling is not that common and you could STILL argue that even if 2 PCs are grappled the higher DEX one has some advantage. Maybe 5e will treat that differently, I don't know. Again IMHO the simplicity of not doing that outweighs any minor loss. In terms of reflex defense I'd say equally that penalizing that for heavy armor probably isn't worth the issues that it raises and I don't see any massive level of inconsistency. Being quick, even in armor, sometimes does help you out, and sometimes it just doesn't. I've yet to see this all be a huge issue. Nor is any of this unique to 4e. Saves in previous editions often represented dodging attacks and they weren't penalized for armor either. AFAICT 4e's handling of this whole issue is pretty consistent with past practice.

So, what you're saying is that light armor should just be crap and everyone that actually wants to be effective should be forced into heavy armor?

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm starting to worry that you aren't bothering to read what I'm writing.

It may be that you weren't entirely clear as to what you ARE saying then.

As I said previously, armor of different types has a number of mechanical implications in 4e. The different types are mechanically distinct. If you want the mechanics to be different, well, OK. Saying that armor in 4e is just 'cosmetic' however is simply not factually correct, so lets base our discussion on what IS factually correct. It seems pointless to start from a starting point which is erroneous. If we are all failing to understand what you're getting at, well sorry, I seem to have had the same interpretation other people did as well. I'm sure we are all happy to have the issue clarified.

Apr 30, 2012 -- 3:35PM, lokiare wrote:

Yeah, but where's your graphics for the rest of the classes.

It's divided into matial, magic, and gish.






Your Strength-based DBZ wizard is likely a Stormlord.
The rogue who knows when to sneak away is a well-played rogue.
The weak cleric is an invoker or oracle.