|
3 years ago ::
Dec 26, 2009 - 7:31AM
#511
|
Date Joined:
Apr 12, 2008
|
I'd say the biggest problem is we don't have enough people like Wrecan who have the time and the inclination to invent stuff like this, and instead we just have a bunch of people whining about how 4E doesn't have enough rules.
Which is almost as bad as people whining about other folks whining...
Flame-bait aside, time and inclination seldom have anything to do with each other. I have all the inclination in the world. It's the time I need more of. I have a wife, two kids, own two businesses, and am on the local city council. My time is pretty well stretched to breaking point as it is. It's very easy for me to breeze through the forums, pick up good bits of advice and info from those with obviously plenty of time on their hands and utilize that info in my games. That's why I'm glad to have these forums. I don't use it as a social networking site like Facebook, though many do. I use it for information I can apply to my games.
In fond memory of Mark "Wrecan" Monack.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 26, 2009 - 7:44AM
#512
|
Date Joined:
Apr 23, 2009
|
Exactly, Hokus. This is why you don't have the time. Likewise, I have the time (on occasion), but I have more important things to be doing than fiddling wit D&D rules. I lack the inclination. This was not to be critical of anybody on this forum; it was venting about other people complaining on other forums that 4.0 should be exactly like 3.5, which makes me wonder: why not just play 3.5 if you want to play something that's exactly like 3.5?
The original core books said that this was our game too. It doesn't feel like that anymore.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 26, 2009 - 8:06AM
#513
|
Date Joined:
Apr 12, 2008
|
...it was venting about other people complaining on other forums that 4.0 should be exactly like 3.5, which makes me wonder: why not just play 3.5 if you want to play something that's exactly like 3.5?
I'm not sure that I've seen anyone that wants 4E to be exactly like 3.5. I have seen many who had a particular fondness for a specific rule or subsystem in a previous edition that they would like to incorporate into 4E, but don't neccessarily know how to do it or have the time to try to figure it out. It might sound like a wonderful idea, but it could have dire consequences on the fine balance that 4E adheres to. For those that do want 4E to be exactly like 3.5....well...you can't help everyone. If they don't want to play 3.5, but are actively trying to make 4E mirror it, then they have a very long, uphill battle infront of them.
I feel responsible for this thread going off in the direction it did, as I'm the one that stated that I don't particularly like the "sleep for a night and everything is back to 100%" mechanic. I wondered if there was a way to incorporate some sort of lasting effect mechanic into 4E without screwing up the entire system. I don't really have the time to come up with, playtest, tweak, and incorporate a rule like this, so the forum-goers did what they do...they did it the hard work for me. They've come up with some pretty good ideas that I don't think will affect the game's balance or flow, while harkening back to previous E's lasting effects mechanics. For that, I salute them. They've made my 4E game more fun for me and those I game with.
In fond memory of Mark "Wrecan" Monack.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 26, 2009 - 9:14PM
#514
|
Date Joined:
Apr 23, 2009
|
And that's great. You decided you wanted something, asked for help, and people were more than willing to give you a houserule that works quite well. If you'll recall, I even added in a few suggestions, so I'm by no means saying that this is a bad thing.
What IS bad is when someone wants the game's fundamental rules to be changed for everyone. I've encountered a few people like that, and not all of them on these forums, either. They want the system changed not only for themselves, but for all other people who play as-is and enjoy it. If this is an attempt to try and enjoy 4E more so that they can play LFR, I have to say tough luck. An entire system of rules can't just be expected to completely reinvent itself because somebody doesn't like it.
To anyone reading this who really is frustrated about 4E's mechanics, and feels that LFR is really their only chance to play a game of D&D, the following is not a joke: try posting ads on the Internet, on Craigslist, and even around town. You may find yourself in luck, and locate some fellow players who also enjoy playing an earlier edition.
The original core books said that this was our game too. It doesn't feel like that anymore.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 27, 2009 - 7:32AM
#515
|
Date Joined:
Aug 29, 2007
|
I liked this thread better when we were arguing about how much the fighter sucked in 3.5.
Not liking the new forums.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 27, 2009 - 7:39AM
#516
|
Date Joined:
Jan 22, 2008
|
And that's great. You decided you wanted something, asked for help, and people were more than willing to give you a houserule that works quite well. If you'll recall, I even added in a few suggestions, so I'm by no means saying that this is a bad thing.
What IS bad is when someone wants the game's fundamental rules to be changed for everyone. I've encountered a few people like that, and not all of them on these forums, either. They want the system changed not only for themselves, but for all other people who play as-is and enjoy it. If this is an attempt to try and enjoy 4E more so that they can play LFR, I have to say tough luck. An entire system of rules can't just be expected to completely reinvent itself because somebody doesn't like it.
To anyone reading this who really is frustrated about 4E's mechanics, and feels that LFR is really their only chance to play a game of D&D, the following is not a joke: try posting ads on the Internet, on Craigslist, and even around town. You may find yourself in luck, and locate some fellow players who also enjoy playing an earlier edition.
Or people who say that they should bring back vancian casting, or get rid of the power system.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 27, 2009 - 3:16PM
#517
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2006
|
I liked this thread better when we were arguing about how much the fighter sucked in 3.5.
People never argue whether the fighter sucks or not, it's always how much it sucks.
Like, on a scale of 1 to "suck", where does the fighter fall, 1 being "sucky" and "suck" being "really sucky".
If anything I say is wrong, clueless or spelt incorrectly, it is because, I am, in general, wrong, clueless and... Well, I'm usually spelt correctly.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 27, 2009 - 5:30PM
#518
|
|
|
I liked this thread better when we were arguing about how much the fighter sucked in 3.5.
People never argue whether the fighter sucks or not, it's always how much it sucks.
Like, on a scale of 1 to "suck", where does the fighter fall, 1 being "sucky" and "suck" being "really sucky".
The answer, of course, is directly proportionate to the willingness of a given DM to houserule.
So, discounting Oberonni, the answer is quite a lot.
Had one DM who solved it by keeping wand/scroll/magic item DCs competitive with regular spells, and giving us access to a group of wizards and artificers willing to make us unique items(after we had saved them from complete annihilation at the hands of some beholders and their minions.)
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
I could say anything in D&D is silly though, because it's a silly game and we are silly people.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 27, 2009 - 5:36PM
#519
|
Date Joined:
Apr 23, 2009
|
3.5 fighters weren't just sucky; they were BORING. Really, there were only a few options available that were actually worthwhile, and anything more than a standard attack required at least one feat to avoid provoking opportunity attacks from everybody and his grandma.
With so many circumstantial options, especially when nobody's using a map or board so that true position is really anybody's guess, how many times would a bull rush actually come in handy? You even needed to take a feat just so that punching somebody didn't give them a free shot at you.
The original core books said that this was our game too. It doesn't feel like that anymore.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 27, 2009 - 6:46PM
#520
|
Date Joined:
Aug 30, 2007
|
3.5 fighters weren't just sucky; they were BORING. Really, there were only a few options available that were actually worthwhile, and anything more than a standard attack required at least one feat to avoid provoking opportunity attacks from everybody and his grandma.
With so many circumstantial options, especially when nobody's using a map or board so that true position is really anybody's guess, how many times would a bull rush actually come in handy? You even needed to take a feat just so that punching somebody didn't give them a free shot at you.
Well, nothing was really stopping you from using a map or board. Plenty of people have done it in every edition. Of course, even with a map there were only a few cases where bull rush was particularly useful. And even though fighters were boring, by higher levels they usually sucked too.
Owner and Proprietor of the House of Trolls.
God of ownership and possession.
|
|
|
