Community

Jan 28, 2011 -- 3:19PM, Istaran wrote:

Don't make me call you a doo doo dum dum head in order to get our "spirited" rating raised.

 

 .

Oh dad burn it that is way too charming.

Jan 28, 2011 -- 3:27PM, FFSAA wrote:

Jan 28, 2011 -- 2:17PM, Foxface wrote:

Blah blah debate debate argue argue.

This is why the 4e wizard is better than the 3.X wizard (and, by extension, 4e is better than 3.X).
Max, Istaran, myself, and others have gotten into semantic debate over a freaking little spell, how it works, and under what conditions, all because the "rules" are laid out in descriptive text whose comprehension is determined by the attitude and temperment of the person doing the reading.

 
  And in 4E you have 10 page threads debating the difference between a staff and a quarterstaff.

  I prefer 3E's problems.  As soon as people start talking about lawful stupid or charm abuse I know I can ignore anything they say as they're incapable of reading and applying rules.  Not know how implaments and weapons are different in 4E is an actual valid problem.

A quarterstaff is a weapon.
A staff is an implement.

A quarterstaff can be used as a staff.  When used as an implement, it is a staff.  When used as a weapon, it is a quarterstaff.

Done.



I'm not saying 4e is perfect, or that no debates happen ever.  Rules issues do come up.  They come up when things are less than perfectly clear, or when the reader needs to filter the rules language through their own interpretation.  The keyword and effect model of rules is, by their very nature, more clear and explicit than plain language.

Jan 28, 2011 -- 3:19PM, Istaran wrote:

Homegames are generally better in various ways, so if you've got a good group of players and a consistant DM (or rotation thereof), that's awesome.
Some of us don't, but LG in the past and LFR now give us an alternative that lets us get together with a wildly varying group of people, only need to commit to DM a session at a time, and generally have a good time.

It turns out I do like playing 4e by RAW, though generally the skill challenge system can use a helping hand. (Some of the LFR authors have been getting good with it, some of the LFR DMs have been getting decent with it, and when neither comes into play we can usually just roll our way through it fairly quickly and get on with the game. But the published-module nature of LFR tends to make the weaknesses of SCs worse.)

Heh. Sadly, I think that would be insufficient. We need more people getting in on the argument, for one. All kinds of cross talk, claims that each other are arguing in bad faith, etc. A few totally reasonable people chiming in on the sidelines with appeals for peaceful co-existance, just for contrast. Punctuate occasionally with lol-cats-esque images. The occasional visit from the ORCs.

You know, like a proper edition war, 4e=WoW or pro-/anti- essentials thread.

::sigh::  Oh, well.  I've been making efforts not to go to that extreme anymore. 

Jan 28, 2011 -- 7:44PM, thaX wrote:

That there is no Touch AC anymore hurts that much more.

Not familiar enough to get that for sure but I basically thought that was the point of attacks which target reflex = those who specialize in using quick thinking and movement to avoid attacks will be better at reflex those wearing heavy armor will frequently suck at defending against a ref attack.?
 

Jan 28, 2011 -- 7:57PM, thaX wrote:

The defenses really don't spread that far apart as it did for Touch AC in the previous system. That is one of the reasons the Warlock's Eldritch Blast was so effective then.

Shrug I see ranges from 1 to 6 with 2 being a solid average.. but some that I use quite a bit still being 4s.. (human militia make good guards for miscellaneous purposes).  I guess it does highly vary by what selection of enemies you use. Do you normally use published adventures?