|
5 years ago ::
Apr 03, 2008 - 8:00AM
#231
|
Date Joined:
Jun 14, 2006
|
My understanding is that the fighter can use 1 healing surge to heal themself once per encounter and once per periods between encounters all per day. The rest are there to be used by clerics and the like who have powers that use them.
While a fighter on his own can only use a single healing surge per combat, out of combat, he can use an unlimited number, if I understand the rules correctly. However, the "threat" and level of resource management seems to move away from the adventuring day and into the encounter. I think Malkav (IIRC) posted on this a while ago in the C&C boards. Anyways, excepting Daily powers, characters need to think of their resources as being used on a per encounter basis, and I see it pretty easy (at least for the DDXP pregens) to run out of healing resources in a tough fight.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Apr 03, 2008 - 8:53AM
#232
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
There's nothing unbelievable about this, actually; this won't break people's suspension of disbelief, because you can only ever heal yourself back to full, and your full hit points are not unreasonable.
Um, yes it is. Healing at any rate that doesn't involve more time that a few seconds is not a natural occurrance. Only magic can accomplish that, and anything else is unreasonable.
/QUOTE]This is silly. First off, magic is entirely arbitrary, and second, there's no reason inherently to suggest that throwing a magic missle would be harder than swinging a sword.
Tell you what. You go get a real sword and swing it. If you can keep it up round after round for the whole day, or even an hour, I'll send you $100.00
And second, again, this won't break suspension of disbelief, because there's nothing unbelievable about it - you're throwing magic, sure, but if you are willing to accept that then being able to toss around weak spells like magic missle all day is not at all unreasonable to believe, the same as swinging a sword all day isn't unreasonable to believe.
Proof positive that you have no concept of what is reasonable and what is not. This has got to be the best example of this from you that I've seen to date. Thanks.
This, too, will not break suspension of disbelief; people accepted ToB classes just fine, by and large. And we don't KNOW that tripping is an encounter power at this point anyway. But again, this won't break many people's suspension of disbelief.
So I can swing a sword every few seconds for 24 hours straight, but I can't trip someone twice in a row? Heh.
I don't think this is going to be a dealbreaker; people often assume as much anyway in 3.x games.
I know at least 20 people for whom this will be a deal breaker.
Raising the dead is always problematic; worth noting, though, NPCs can be raised as well, just not most of them. Raising the dead usually will rile people's suspension of disbelief, and unless it is an epic quest to raise the dead it will ALWAYS break suspension of disbelief. It doesn't matter HOW many people can be raised from the dead; if any can, it will break suspension of disbelief. They see this as a worthwhile sacrifice.
This is why most people, PCs included, don't come back in the games I run or play in.
Nothing wrong with that. Again, magic is arbitrary, and the idea of not being able to control/use a magical item is a pretty common trope.
It's the rule that's arbitrary. WoTC suddenly has decided that I'm incompetent to figure out if a ring will be unbalancing to my campaign if I hand it out at 5th level. That's just wrong.
This is a good thing; wizards were hideously broken in 3.x at least in part due to their versatility and ability to superscede all other roles. NO class should be as versatile as a 3.x wizard is.
No, they weren't. They were more powerful than other classes, yes. They had a handful of truly broken spells, yes(easily fixed). They were NOT however so broken that they needed to be neutered the way WoTC is doing it in 4ed.
Untrue. 4e is exactly as focused on combat as every other edition of D&D has been.
This is flat out wrong. 4ed rewards lots of encounters, and has designed things to allow for many more encounters a day. This is an INCREASE over every other edition yet put out.
Because raising the dead is realistic?
In a fantasy setting, yes, but it should be very difficult to do.
Every edition assumed that, actually. You just weren't paying attention. And IIRC rods in 2nd edition were level dependent, and intelligent items in both second AND third editions were level dependent (as if you were too low level, they'd take over your mind).
1) They COULD take over your mind. Not all intelligent swords were evil.
2) Stats were more important than levels if I recall correctly.
You can't even spell military and you claim to be ex-military? I find that claim somewhat dubious. And if they're hard to perform, then it makes sense you can only pull it off once per combat - you may be trying more, but that one time you use the power was the time you had a good chance of success.
If this were the case, you'd lose your attacks in every round that you made the attempt and failed. Failed attempts take time, too. But this is more of that reasonable/unreasonable stuff that you have such a hard time with.
Let's turn this around: if hit points DO represent physical damage, then why don't you take penalties for taking damage? You cannot answer that question.
Because at some point, game fun has to trump realism to a degree. However, when you allow unrealism to advance to such a degree as to have it not exist, then you also lose out on game fun.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Apr 03, 2008 - 9:38AM
#233
|
Date Joined:
Jun 14, 2006
|
Good Pelor! I understand the use for line-by-line analysis, and it is effective in certain instances, but the need to resort to it with every post and the need to offer a statement in response to every statement is hard to read, aggravating, and therefore a poor persuasive technique! The back and forth bickering (reproduced below) doesn't add anything to anyone's understanding of anything. Ever. half a sentence
I don't think this will be a dealbreaker.
///
I I don't think this will be a dealbreaker.
It will for some people.
So please, boil down your posts to the relevant information, and if you need to quote line-by-line, then fine, but cherry-pick the good parts. I know I am prone to text-blocking, but I like to think that when I do, I include summations or, in really bad cases, spoiler blocks. Line-by-line retorts that take up 3 feet of screen space only serve to further the impression that these boards are for menial bickering and not for issue analysis.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Apr 03, 2008 - 9:39AM
#234
|
Date Joined:
Aug 27, 2007
|
Um, yes it is. Healing at any rate that doesn't involve more time that a few seconds is not a natural occurrance. Only magic can accomplish that, and anything else is unreasonable.
Adrenaline, surface wounds, scratches, bruises. call them what you want.
Tell you what. You go get a real sword and swing it. If you can keep it up round after round for the whole day, or even an hour, I'll send you $100.00
Sure, and when D&D has exhaustion penalties for fighters for prolonged combat other then HP damage, i'll take that bet. The fighter can swing that all day. The wizard can cast MM all day. Why? They are both trained that way.
So I can swing a sword every few seconds for 24 hours straight, but I can't trip someone twice in a row? Heh.
Have you scene the rule for trip yet? If so please quote it to us or provide a link
It's the rule that's arbitrary. WoTC suddenly has decided that I'm incompetent to figure out if a ring will be unbalancing to my campaign if I hand it out at 5th level. That's just wrong.
no, they havent decided that. They printed it there as a recommendation for you to make it easier to decide when to provide it to the party. Previously you had to guess based on a GP value and the description alone. If you want to put it in sooner or later in the game its still up to you.
No, they weren't. They were more powerful than other classes, yes. They had a handful of truly broken spells, yes(easily fixed). They were NOT however so broken that they needed to be neutered the way WoTC is doing it in 4ed.
How are they being neutered? They still cast plenty of spells, really more spells. They simply dont waste slots on spells that take a while to cast, like rituals. Quit jumping to conculsions.
This is flat out wrong. 4ed rewards lots of encounters, and has designed things to allow for many more encounters a day. This is an INCREASE over every other edition yet put out.
Your getting this from where?
Because at some point, game fun has to trump realism to a degree. However, when you allow unrealism to advance to such a degree as to have it not exist, then you also lose out on game fun.
Please define your opinion of appropriate realism for a fantasy universe please?
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Apr 03, 2008 - 10:44AM
#235
|
Date Joined:
Jul 27, 2002
|
@MaxPerson:
I think you missed TD's point entirely. . .
He was saying that: in the game, characters can make melee attacks all day without penalty (though you may rule otherwise, the game says there isn't one); in real life this would be a tiring activity; therefore - even if casting Magic Missle were 'tiring' - it should be no more unreasonable that characters can cast the spell all day without penalty.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Apr 03, 2008 - 11:01AM
#236
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
Adrenaline, surface wounds, scratches, bruises. call them what you want.
Call them what you want, and it will still be a rose. You CANNOT heal surface wounds, scratches, or bruises in seconds. All of those will contribute to your losing conciousness faster in the next fight. You might not feel a bruise, but boy will you feel it in spades when someone hits you there the second time. Adrenalin allows you to TEMPORARILY ignore pain, when it's done, you will feel it, and often be in worse shape because of it. It does not ever heal.
Sure, and when D&D has exhaustion penalties for fighters for prolonged combat other then HP damage, i'll take that bet. The fighter can swing that all day. The wizard can cast MM all day. Why? They are both trained that way.
It should. But that wasn't the point, my point was that he cannot tell what is realistic and what is not, and since he clearly cannot, his opinions on realism can't be counted for much.
Have you scene the rule for trip yet? If so please quote it to us or provide a link
Once again, the point sails over your head at a fairly high distance. After this many time where you fail to actually read what I say, I'm not going to re-explain myself to you. I will simply point out high high point went sailing THIS time.
How are they being neutered? They still cast plenty of spells, really more spells. They simply dont waste slots on spells that take a while to cast, like rituals. Quit jumping to conculsions.
YAY! I can cast my selection of 10 spells(slight exagerration) more often! If rituals come out and 1) do not cost a lot of money. 2) take a long time to cast. 3) have some which require additional people. 4) require a fair amount of exotic, hard to get componants. I will be surprised. The term ritual implies all of the above.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Apr 03, 2008 - 11:02AM
#237
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
@MaxPerson:
I think you missed TD's point entirely. . .
He was saying that: in the game, characters can make melee attacks all day without penalty (though you may rule otherwise, the game says there isn't one); in real life this would be a tiring activity; therefore - even if casting Magic Missle were 'tiring' - it should be no more unreasonable that characters can cast the spell all day without penalty.
No, he was VERY clear that he said it was perfectly realistic to think that someone could swing a sword all day. We already KNOW that in the game you can do this. It's his sense of what is realistic and what is not that is skewed.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Apr 03, 2008 - 11:07AM
#238
|
Date Joined:
Aug 27, 2007
|
YAY! I can cast my selection of 10 spells(slight exagerration) more often!
rather then use a wand or scroll to do the same thing? Or use up those low level slots?
If rituals come out and 1) do not cost a lot of money.
you mean spell components? or did you ignore those in 3.X as well.
2) take a long time to cast.
Longer then 6 seconds yes.. does that mean 3 days under the moonlight? not nessarily.
3) have some which require additional people.
For complex rituals like raise dead.. i have no problem with that.
4) require a fair amount of exotic, hard to get componants.
again, spell components. I'd say a perfect diamond worth 10,000GP qualifies as hard and/or exotic....
I will be surprised. The term ritual implies all of the above.
And is no differant than 3.X in most respects.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Apr 03, 2008 - 11:59AM
#239
|
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2007
|
Where's the love, or at least tolerance?
Clearly, love and/or tolerance is a one way street in this thread. It seems to be extremely "pro-4e" for a thread that is asking us what we do not like about 4e...
I was asked what I did not like about 4e. I gave a pretty straight forward response that it "seems" less realistic to me. I also provided examples of the reasons it "feels" less realistic.
My feelings remain the same. I still believe that 4e is sacrificing realism for mechanics, more so than any of the previous editions.
P.S. Where is the love for 3.5 and 2e???
Where is the tolerance for those who are not pro-4e???
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Apr 03, 2008 - 12:09PM
#240
|
- Forum Guide
- Survived Order 66
- Rules Lawyer from Hell
- Keeper of the F.A.Q.
|
To be a stubborn, narrow-minded ignoramus who doesn't accept change...
...Or to be a blind sheep following the herd’s latest trend?
That is the question.
Choices. Choices.
:P
|
|
|
