|
5 years ago ::
Oct 24, 2008 - 1:34PM
#51
|
Date Joined:
Sep 28, 2006
|
Who are these "4ed experts," and where can I see/hear them stating this personally?
I ask because there is nothing I can find in the actual gaming product that says this.
He's vastly mangling an arguement from a few threads back where some people complained you NEEDED a 18 or 20 in primary stats and a bunch stepped up to state that a 16 (before racials) was probably better idea due to extra points for other stats and that you may even be able to get away with a 14.
If you sub op your character in every concievable way (bad stat choice, weak equipment, poor power selection, bad feat choice) of course it's going to eventually underperform what is expected of a character. Maxperson as usual considers this a failure of the entire system as opposed to a logical result of continual bad ideas.
Exactly. As an option - not standard. Compare standard games. Whatever option you choose to use is fine for gaming, but not for fair comparison - which is what we're attempting here.
To be fair, 4th ED presents it as an option, 3rd ED doesn't. That's a fair comparison point. It was easy enough in 4th ED to toss in a quick fix. Not so for 3rd.
Well... At least we got custom avatars....
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Oct 24, 2008 - 1:39PM
#52
|
Date Joined:
Sep 25, 2007
|
All the pro-4ed number crunchers. I went through a thread where I said that a 12 SHOULD be fine for someone to put in their prime stat, given that a 12 is above average. I got told over and over again, in no uncertain terms, that a 12 = fail. Many of them said a 14 = fail. However, just as many said a 14 was okay, so 14 seems to be the cut off for success. Lose +1 more with a 12, and game over.
All I have to say on this matter:
1) If your Prime Ability is 12, every edition I have played would make this - by default - a re-roll situation.
2) 4th is build assuming the standard array (16, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10) and suggests putting your highest score where you get the most out of it - the game does "expect" a 16 or 18 in your prime ability.
3) Unless you are testing the extremes of the system - +1 doesn't change that much.
Careful, man. That much logic might be illegal on the internet. - Salla
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Oct 24, 2008 - 1:39PM
#53
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
He's vastly mangling an arguement from a few threads back where some people complained you NEEDED a 18 or 20 in primary stats and a bunch stepped up to state that a 16 (before racials) was probably better idea due to extra points for other stats and that you may even be able to get away with a 14.
No, no I'm not. That was a different thread. If you're going to accuse me of something, try to at least have your facts straight.
If you sub op your character in every concievable way (bad stat choice, weak equipment, poor power selection, bad feat choice) of course it's going to eventually underperform what is expected of a character. Maxperson as usual considers this a failure of the entire system as opposed to a logical result of continual bad ideas.
See above. It's clear that you have no idea what I'm saying, so it behooves you to not comment on posts until you do. You'll make less a fool of yourself that way.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Oct 24, 2008 - 1:42PM
#54
|
Date Joined:
Dec 24, 2007
|
To be fair, 4th ED presents it as an option, 3rd ED doesn't. That's a fair comparison point. It was easy enough in 4th ED to toss in a quick fix. Not so for 3rd.
Sure, 4e's got 3e on that one. That's true. But it's still an option - albeit an option easier to implement in 4e than 3e. But comparing an altered game - designer created option or not - to an unaltered one is not a fair comparison. Standard 3e requires you to have magical gear or fail. Standard 4e is the same. That's all I'm gettin' at. The ease of fixing the problem does not matter here. The fact remains that a problem still exists. And that problem is the same as it always was.
Resident Prophet of the OTTer.Section Six Soldier Front Door of the House of Trolls If you're terribly afraid of your character dying, it may be best if you roleplayed something other than an adventurer.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Oct 24, 2008 - 1:43PM
#55
|
Date Joined:
Jun 22, 2008
|
Anyone remember the old D&D cartoon? Each character had one magic item. They never gained more over the course of 20 some odd adventures.
There was once a D&D Board Game. Not much magic in there either. If you were lucky you got a +2 sword before fighting the red dragon on the deepest level.
How many magic items did Aragorn have?
In the last 2 3E campaigns I've played we were lucky to get a magic item before 4th level. At 8th level we are creating our own but it costs xp. In 4E, PCs are getting 4 items before 2nd level. By 4th level they can make their own.
My preference is fewer items. If only to decrease the accounting nightmare.
A 23rd level demigod shouldn't need to rely on magic items to remain competitive. I prefer them to be accessories instead of necessities.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Oct 24, 2008 - 1:45PM
#56
|
Date Joined:
Oct 18, 2007
|
I've been told by many different players that 20 is too much, 16-18 is the sweet spot, and 14 is okay, but low. A 12, absolutely out of the question. That +1 seems to make all the difference.
That's not a +1 difference you are describing, it is a +2\+3 difference from optimal. At 14, you are +1\+2 below optimal, and can still survive - but it will be tough. At 12, you could probably still make it with very clever play, but your character is seriously handicapped. It is not, as you imply, a cutoff line where your character instantly dies out of creation.
Likewise, having no magic item bonuses by 30th level, assuming your DM makes no attempt to alter to fit this nonstandard campaign world, means you'll be hit around 25% more often and be hitting 25% less. You'll need to play much, much more intelligently, taking full advantage of tactics and other kinds of bonuses, but you will not die out of hand. That is in a campaign world where the DM has willingly tossed out a calculated bonus and not made any even cursory attempt to rebalance.
Compare to a 3e character without a ring of free action.
My laptop resolution is 800x400.
The forum is 1224 pixels wide. Sorry, I won't be replying to many people until the designers learn to use "width: x%" instead of pixels.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Oct 24, 2008 - 1:45PM
#57
|
Date Joined:
Jun 22, 2008
|
He's vastly mangling an arguement from a few threads back where some people complained you NEEDED a 18 or 20 in primary stats and a bunch stepped up to state that a 16 (before racials) was probably better idea due to extra points for other stats and that you may even be able to get away with a 14.
Isn't a 16 before racials equal to an 18??
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Oct 24, 2008 - 1:46PM
#58
|
Date Joined:
Jul 14, 2008
|
That got heated fast.
Max, proving that a 12 in a primary stat sucks does not prove that +1 difference matters. What is the difference between $1 and $2? It's only +1, but $2 means I can afford a bus ticket and I get to get home tonight. The difference between 12 and 14 is more than just +1, its more the difference between 5% as compared to 0% and 10% as compared to 0%.
One-half of the tabletop gaming news podcast Going LastCo-author on AoA 2-3 and 4-1.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Oct 24, 2008 - 1:46PM
#59
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
How many magic items did Aragorn have?
3ish, and one was broken for most of his carreer.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Oct 24, 2008 - 1:49PM
#60
|
Date Joined:
Jul 14, 2008
|
Sounds like a D&D character to me- no matter the level. Magic Armor, Magic Weapon, Magic Necklace. The only items a character EVER needs (the fact that characters *can* get more doesn't mean anything, the rest is superfluous) are those three, and even then you can survive if you play smart.
One-half of the tabletop gaming news podcast Going LastCo-author on AoA 2-3 and 4-1.
|
|
|
