| Author |
 Topic  |
|
shadowni87
Learned Scribe
USA
111 Posts |
 Posted - 06 Oct 2011 : 21:38:12
|
|
is it just me , or is everything after 2nd ed. just getting rediculous!!! if im the only one please let me know, but all the changes made to D&D3 ed. and on just got stupid for all the rules
|
Libera animus omnium fidelium defunctorum de poenis obscurum |
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 06 Oct 2011 : 21:51:24
|
| That is the same way many people feel about the changes when 4e came about. And probably how many will feel about the changes when 5e comes about. |
Errant d20 Designer - My Blog (last updated January 06, 2016)
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back. --Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass
"Mmm, not the darkness," Myrin murmured. "Don't cast it there." --Erik Scott de Bie, Shadowbane
* My character sheets (PFRPG, 3.5, and AE versions; not viewable in Internet Explorer)
* Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Reference Document (PFRPG OGL Rules)
* The Hypertext d20 SRD (3.5 OGL Rules)
* 3.5 D&D Archives
My game design work:
* Heroes of the Jade Oath (PFRPG, conversion; Rite Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 1: Cantrips & Orisons (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 2: 1st-Level Spells (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Martial Arts Guidebook (forthcoming) (PFRPG, designer; Rite Publishing)
|
 |
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 06 Oct 2011 : 22:10:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by shadowni87
is it just me , or is everything after 2nd ed. just getting rediculous!!! if im the only one please let me know, but all the changes made to D&D3 ed. and on just got stupid for all the rules
I loved a lot of the lore in 2E, and if I could reset the canon Realms, I'd roll back to right after Cloak & Dagger. That said, there were some events from 3E that I liked, such as the Reclamation of Myth Drannor (though I'd've handled it a bit differently) and the Dragonrage (again, I'd've done it a bit different). |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4429 Posts |
Posted - 06 Oct 2011 : 22:14:38
|
With the fear of this thread turing into another Edition War of "the way I play an elven princess is better than the way YOU play an elven princess", I'm asking what sort of discussion the OP is really asking here?
Do you want opinions that might differ from your or is this a sort of "2E/AD&D RALLY FTW!!!" thread? |
|
|
|
Artemas Entreri
Great Reader
USA
3131 Posts |
Posted - 06 Oct 2011 : 23:58:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by shadowni87
is it just me , or is everything after 2nd ed. just getting rediculous!!! if im the only one please let me know, but all the changes made to D&D3 ed. and on just got stupid for all the rules
I loved a lot of the lore in 2E, and if I could reset the canon Realms, I'd roll back to right after Cloak & Dagger. That said, there were some events from 3E that I liked, such as the Reclamation of Myth Drannor (though I'd've handled it a bit differently) and the Dragonrage (again, I'd've done it a bit different).
Wooly, I think he was talking about the D&D game rules and not Realms events. |
Some people have a way with words, and other people...oh, uh, not have way. -Steve Martin
Amazon "KindleUnlimited" Free Trial: http://amzn.to/2AJ4yD2
Try Audible and Get 2 Free Audio Books! https://amzn.to/2IgBede |
|
|
|
Artemas Entreri
Great Reader
USA
3131 Posts |
Posted - 06 Oct 2011 : 23:59:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by shadowni87
is it just me , or is everything after 2nd ed. just getting rediculous!!! if im the only one please let me know, but all the changes made to D&D3 ed. and on just got stupid for all the rules
I am with you. 2nd ED for me was the perfect balance of rules and freedom to make it your own. I looked at the 3rd ED+ and it didn't interest me at all. |
Some people have a way with words, and other people...oh, uh, not have way. -Steve Martin
Amazon "KindleUnlimited" Free Trial: http://amzn.to/2AJ4yD2
Try Audible and Get 2 Free Audio Books! https://amzn.to/2IgBede |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 07 Oct 2011 : 00:19:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by entreri3478
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by shadowni87
is it just me , or is everything after 2nd ed. just getting rediculous!!! if im the only one please let me know, but all the changes made to D&D3 ed. and on just got stupid for all the rules
I loved a lot of the lore in 2E, and if I could reset the canon Realms, I'd roll back to right after Cloak & Dagger. That said, there were some events from 3E that I liked, such as the Reclamation of Myth Drannor (though I'd've handled it a bit differently) and the Dragonrage (again, I'd've done it a bit different).
Wooly, I think he was talking about the D&D game rules and not Realms events.
Well, in terms of rules... I grew up in 2E, and I still tend to think in 2E terms. That said, I think 3.x is a great system, and if I was playing right now, it'd be 3.5 or Pathfinder. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Alystra Illianniis
Great Reader
USA
3750 Posts |
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 07 Oct 2011 : 01:35:31
|
Eh. My only real gripe with 3e was the fact that some of the more extensive and worthwhile plot-hooks from 2e, like the Manshoon Wars and the Harper/Moonstar schism, were either brushed aside outright, or left tangling for far too long.
Other than that, I've enjoyed the lot of 3e info. Certainly not to the same regard that I first fell in love with the original 1e and 2e Realmslore [because that's where I was fortunate enough to begin my journey through the Realms], but there were a great many of my favourite Lorelords still working on 3e material, so I can treasure it almost as much as I do the majority of 2e stuff. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Nilus Reynard
Learned Scribe
Canada
137 Posts |
Posted - 07 Oct 2011 : 02:40:24
|
quote:
Well, in terms of rules... I grew up in 2E, and I still tend to think in 2E terms.
I played 2E for so many years that I find it somewhat difficult to get into any of the other editions, it kind of feels like I am new to the game again. I imagine that if I had started playing with 3E or 3.5E rules, I would feel the same about 4E.
The (slowly dying) group I play with still uses 2E rules, we just shape it to fit whatever timespan we are going with. |
Nilus Reynard
Doom Master of Beshaba, Hand of Despair.
P24 Hm CN
(2nd Edition AD&D) |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7969 Posts |
Posted - 07 Oct 2011 : 03:12:32
|
I dabbled into 1E intermittently, then cut my teeth on 2E, then grognarded in 2E for many years. Although I admit that - once all the Complete Handbooks, DM's/Player's Options, diverse setting lore, and tons of other 2E-addon materials are included the rules become haphazardly scattered and somewhat cumbersome. 3E suffered from this fate as well (actually, much worse if you consider 3.5E and mountains of third-party d20/OGL stuff), but it also managed to cleanup a lot of the Gygaxian quirkiness into a more streamlined ruleset; my gaming group intermittently hops between 2E and 3E, both are good, neither is perfect. We've tried 4E rules but the consensus is that while it has many worthwhile merits it's just not sophisticated enough for our liking.
Just talking about the rules changes, not about any setting changes. These have always been separate things at my table; the setting remains just what and where the setting is, it is not arbitrarily altered to accomodate, introduce, or explain different rulesets. I've often wondered why many people say that they love something from one edition, something else from another, and vehemently declare their hatred of elements from both ... yet refuse to just adapt all their preferences into a selected house blend ... or why they might revile canon changes while stubbornly insisting on maintaining canon integrity. My logic is to just take the setting I like and rules I like, play the game, quit whining, and have some fun.
I won't mention any names, but many Realms authors have confessed a distinct preference for the golden age of 2E D&D. Of course, it's generally hard to get them to say such things these days, since they are somewhat obligated to "prefer" whichever edition they spent the most time designing/writing/playtesting when directly queried ... it doesn't take too long to uncover such secrets when searching through archived interviews and forum talk, if one is so inclined. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4429 Posts |
Posted - 07 Oct 2011 : 15:08:24
|
When I got first introduced to D&D it was with 2E and, more importantly, the Baldur's Gate PC games. It was an OK system for it's time and brought back some fond memories. Our DM was pretty amazing and really made it come to life and the Rules were just there to facilitate character interaction via combat. Spells had their place but they didn't seem to really over complicate things.
When I got into 3E, it was a huge change to character advancement and a lot of fun too. It felt more.....liberating that multiple options where available no matter your race. Paladin's weren't exclusive to Humans, Dwarves could dual-class (aka Multiclass) and there were no Racial level Caps. Personally, I've felt that these changes were necessary for the game to advance.
Even with 4E I've felt that the rules were fairly balanced and exciting. It promoted more team-based tactics and rewarded those who worked really well as a group for Co-Op play.
What it boils down to is that all the systems of D&D promote Roleplay and fun. They all gave me great memories of hanging out with my friends telling interesting stories. There are aspects that I like more than others and a preference for a specific system but I never thought that one system was far superior than any other (and even at this point where I probably hate playing 2E now). |
|
|
|
shadowni87
Learned Scribe
USA
111 Posts |
Posted - 07 Oct 2011 : 20:32:22
|
ok ok. i was talkingf about the rules, and i also started on 2nd ed, but i spent years memorizing all these stupid rules with all the damn books and what do ya know they change to 3rd ed. not to mantion everyone siad they loved 3rd ed and i had no one to play 2nd ed. i might be alittle but hurt but seriosly that s**t sucks!
|
Libera animus omnium fidelium defunctorum de poenis obscurum |
|
|
|
Gouf
Seeker
USA
75 Posts |
Posted - 17 Oct 2011 : 04:46:30
|
| I started on Basic. Then 1e then moved into 2e. I fell in love with 2e and have an absurd number of rpg books for it. I tried 3/3.5 and left the campaign after 3 sessions. I found the rules cumbersome. It just didn't do it for me. My current group is playing 2e and after 4 years are still loving it. So, yeah, for me, it's 2e forever. |
"Why is the torch burning blue?" |
Edited by - Gouf on 17 Oct 2011 04:53:11 |
|
|
|
Wolfhound75
Learned Scribe
USA
217 Posts |
Posted - 02 Dec 2011 : 22:15:43
|
I tend to find myself leaning toward Diffan's camp with my feelings on the various iterations of systems. Each system has its good points and not so good points. Since this is basically a discussion of opinion, here is mine:
Original D&D / 1E - Was still pretty young and may have been involved in a few sessions/campaign at the local game shop but since I can't say for certain, I won't comment.
2nd Edition - I played extensively as I had hit my teenage years and had a steady group all the way until we graduated high school. What I really liked about this edition was both game mechanics and lore. At the time, it seemed to me a great system that let you do things I had never experienced the ability to accomplish in other games. Every aspect was well thought out and worked well together. As time progressed, I found that I still really liked the system in comparison to other gaming systems I was introduced to (GURPS, Battletech/Mechwarrior being a couple of examples). As far as lore goes, what I found that I really liked was the impression that the world was a big, wild, dangerous place. There were pockets of civilization but if you travelled, even a paved road from one city to another, you faced the possibility of all manner of untoward things occurring to your party. Some areas had been fairly highly detailed, other areas had been developed in general but a lot of the details of what you found, an abandoned underground complex here, a vine-covered abandoned ruin there, or even an unknown city-state mustering an army in secret, was left to the gamers to develop. In other words, the only limits were your imagination. The mechanics of the game were a way to interact with this world and didn't get in the way of its enjoyment.
3.0 Edition - I completely missed playing this iteration of the rules due to some SoBs deciding to crash a couple of airplanes into a couple of buildings, but did pick up the PHB. My impression from reading was that it was a drastic change from the game I knew but, it had some possible good points and attempted to address some of the areas of 2E that, over years of playing, I felt had become tedious. Unfortunately, having never played it, it's just my impression from a very limited point of view. The lore, which I'm still getting caught up on, contains some pretty significant events in the history of the realms. While I know the events occurred and there is no changing the canon facts, some of them leave the impression that the real reason they occurred is WotC wanted to remake the world in their image and needed a series of cataclysms to make it believable.
3.5 Edition – I’ve played several campaigns in this iteration (but set in the 2E era for lore) and found I greatly enjoy playing this edition as well. So much so that if you gave me a choice of a 2E or a 3.5E campaign, I would let a d2 decide my fate. I think it has done a nice job streamlining some of those areas I mentioned that I found tedious after years of 2E and, I love the feeling that your character can grow and advance in whatever direction you want. The possibilities for unique characters are nearly as limitless as the individuals who inhabit the realms. I struggle with the lore issues still, though I’m not sure if this is because of my forced hiatus from gaming or because of the penchant for a person to prefer the known to the unknown. I’ve got a lot of reading to catch up on for certain. While the events are now canon and have occurred, I’m finding that if you choose to tie your campaign to the timeline of the realms, they can effectively hamper/destroy your campaign or generate huge possibilities full of outstanding adventure depending upon how they are handled.
4th Edition – My last gaming group had a couple who immediately bought this iteration the moment it was released on the market. While we finished our 3.5E campaign, they put together a stand-alone adventure lasting about ten sessions so that we could all “test the water” as they put it. The result of which, they both liked it immensely as the 3.5E campaign was their initial introduction to D&D but, those of us who had cut our teeth on 2E found it exactly as Diffan’s signature line says – …less filling. I felt it was a watered-down, mass market geared attempt to attract WoW players back toward a pen & paper setting. It annoyed me to no end that I felt you no longer had to play a character intelligently as, no matter how much you did, you always had an action that you could always do. “I’m not sure, given the way things have been going for us, that I should cast this spell now. What if we get into some massive trouble trying to get out again?” feels as if it became, “I fireball them! With the player thinking that, “Even if I run out of spells I won’t be totally useless!” I have yet to read any of the lore associated with it, except by accident because any D&D book is better than no D&D book while overseas and, I'd rather reread my favorites. All told, I think it took away from the depth and flavor the game had for me and I’d prefer not to participate in another campaign run under this edition.
Good Hunting!
Wolfhound |
"Firepower - if it's not working, you're not using enough." ~ Military Proverb
"If at first you do succeed, you must've rolled a natural 20!" |
|
|
|
Brix
Learned Scribe
147 Posts |
Posted - 04 Dec 2011 : 09:26:42
|
I think that each edition has its flaws. At the moment we play pathfinder rpg. Before that we played 1st and 2nd edition of the game. We never played 4th edition, because of it's card game/ hero quest flavour.
But even our 3/3.5/PRPG has flaws. For me the most important one is, that it is very cumbersome. And it's getting more cumbersome the more books are released.
2nd Edition was quick to play but had some stupid restrictions
I often compare the different editions to computer operating systems:
2E = DOS : stable, fast, but can't do many things
3E = Windows: can do many things, but gets slower the longer you use it
For me a hybrid of both worlds would be perfect.
Something like that:
* no feats
* substitude 2E saving throws with 3E saving throws
* substitude 2E non weapon profs with 3E skills
* substitude 2E weapon profs with weapon groups
* featless races
* featless classes
* core d20 engine
* no absolutes: +10 bonus instead of immunity
* etc.. |
|
|
|
|
Seravin
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1265 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2011 : 14:21:39
|
I only really learned 2nd and 1st edition AD&D, and 2nd edition is what I used for most of my campaigns...so 2nd edition always wins.
Lorewise, I do find the novels and modules/games from the 80s and 90s up to BG2 to be more fun and interesting than the bleak stuff of the mid 2000s and I absoultely loathe the 4th edition lore for the Realms (obviously).
However, I've heard the 4th edition rules are fun and wonderful to play from many people. I'd love to try them in a pre or just post Time of the Troubles era Realms setting. |
|
|
|
Artemas Entreri
Great Reader
USA
3131 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2011 : 14:26:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Seravin
I only really learned 2nd and 1st edition AD&D, and 2nd edition is what I used for most of my campaigns...so 2nd edition always wins.
Lorewise, I do find the novels and modules/games from the 80s and 90s up to BG2 to be more fun and interesting than the bleak stuff of the mid 2000s and I absoultely loathe the 4th edition lore for the Realms (obviously).
However, I've heard the 4th edition rules are fun and wonderful to play from many people. I'd love to try them in a pre or just post Time of the Troubles era Realms setting.
I agree also. Although i will never try the 4E stuff. All of the lame epic abilities do not appeal to me at all. 2nd Ed is classic for me |
Some people have a way with words, and other people...oh, uh, not have way. -Steve Martin
Amazon "KindleUnlimited" Free Trial: http://amzn.to/2AJ4yD2
Try Audible and Get 2 Free Audio Books! https://amzn.to/2IgBede |
|
|
|
Drakul
Senior Scribe
USA
367 Posts |
|
|
BARDOBARBAROS
Senior Scribe
Greece
581 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2011 : 16:49:48
|
| I also prefer the feeling of 2nd edition ! |
BARDOBARBAROS DOES NOT KILL.
HE DECAPITATES!!!
"The city changes, but the fools within it remain always the same" (Edwin Odesseiron- Baldur's gate 2) |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4429 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2011 : 16:52:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Seravin
However, I've heard the 4th edition rules are fun and wonderful to play from many people. I'd love to try them in a pre or just post Time of the Troubles era Realms setting.
That's easy enough to do. 4E rules really don't throw any wrenches into the setting if you don't want them to. Vancian-magic is still there with Encounter/Daily powers for.....well pretty much every non-Essential class. Eladrin are easily explained as elves from Faerie or, you could just retconn Star, Moon, and Sun elves as them (mechanically) yet just call them by their usual names, like how it's done currently.
Really it depends on how you like to play. 4E does a lot of things differently such as an emphasis on class balance, team play, and a more openess to magic for all yet retains a lot of core structure of D&D as a whole. Wizard cast spells, control the battlefield, use staffs and orbs and wands. Fighters use powers to engage enemies in melee, have abilities that make enemies target them over other, more vulnerable targets. You still have Fort/Ref/Will saves and you still roll d20 for attacks and saving throws. Attacks are now based off of a class's primary ability score instead of all melee attacks going through Strength only or Ranged power going through Dex only. Spells aren't as devestating, often having penalties that last for a few rounds vs. minutes, hours, or permanent penalties at the whim of a roll. |
|
|
|
froglegg
Learned Scribe
317 Posts |
Posted - 17 Dec 2011 : 18:32:26
|
You should try some real flying-by-the-seat-of-your-pants gaming.
Break out your Old Grey Box and add B/X or BECM rules and WOO-HOO!
Wide open gaming and fast paced fun!
John |
Long live Alias and Dragonbait! Kate Novak and Jeff Grubb the Realms need you more then ever!
On my word as a sage nothing within these pages is false, but not all of it may prove to be true. - Elminster of Shadowdale
The Old Grey Box gets better with age! |
|
|
|
Matt James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
918 Posts |
Posted - 17 Dec 2011 : 20:40:40
|
| I have my own system that I would like to use when running around in the Realms. Ah, one day perhaps. |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4429 Posts |
Posted - 26 Dec 2011 : 13:54:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
I have my own system that I would like to use when running around in the Realms. Ah, one day perhaps.
.............Go on |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2384 Posts |
Posted - 26 Dec 2011 : 18:47:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by entreri3478
I agree also. Although i will never try the 4E stuff. All of the lame epic abilities do not appeal to me at all. 2nd Ed is classic for me
Yes, but customization in AD&D is... unwieldy, at best. I'd prefer at least 2.5 - PO is very, very flexible and can be good, even if it always needs manual tuning. A bit like penguinux distributions less user-friendly than Fedora and *buntu - you know just about anything can be done, but you'll have to dive all the way into its internals for your fish, because no one cared to make it easy. 
The thing is, before 3.0 it was made to give tools for modeling a setting, and later gradually rolled into providing an abstract generic MUD that can be beaten with a hammer until it resembles the setting you need. I consider the latter to require at least the same effort to make sense plus bonus annoyance - YMMV, of course.
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
That's easy enough to do. 4E rules really don't throw any wrenches into the setting if you don't want them to. Vancian-magic is still there with Encounter/Daily powers for.....well pretty much every non-Essential class. Eladrin are easily explained as elves from Faerie or, you could just retconn
In other words, it "doesn't throw any wrenches" as long as you run around and catch them in time. 
And IMHO, "daily powers" is one of the most cringeworthy parts. It's usually okay with magic, but otherwise looks... say... no better than if a thief would be able to pick pockets only 3/day.
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
I have my own system that I would like to use when running around in the Realms. Ah, one day perhaps.
Interesting. (looking around) If it's offtopic, maybe somewhere on rpg.net or thepiazza.org.uk forums? |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4429 Posts |
Posted - 26 Dec 2011 : 19:26:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
That's easy enough to do. 4E rules really don't throw any wrenches into the setting if you don't want them to. Vancian-magic is still there with Encounter/Daily powers for.....well pretty much every non-Essential class. Eladrin are easily explained as elves from Faerie or, you could just retconn
In other words, it "doesn't throw any wrenches" as long as you run around and catch them in time.
And IMHO, "daily powers" is one of the most cringeworthy parts. It's usually okay with magic, but otherwise looks... say... no better than if a thief would be able to pick pockets only 3/day.
Be that as it may, no worse than Stunning Fist X/day or the other 500 other X/day aspects of 3E. I don't really see the AEDU mechanic (at-will/encounter/daily/utiliy) as abstract as others do. Realistically, I could Bench Press 320lbs., but to do that successfully more than once per day is highly unlikely. Apply those same physics to Fighting or Combat Maneuvers or what have you and volia. But I realize that this style isn't for everyone. And of course the layout is really rather uninteresting and could've gained ALOT more support with older, more "Classic" looks of the 3E and prior books with the "weathered parchment" layout.
As to 4E mechanics and Realms continunity, elves being Eladrin (in Mechanics only) is probably the only real change that would effect the story/setting material by any means. Everything else is, as they say "Easy Peasy".
|
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7969 Posts |
Posted - 27 Dec 2011 : 06:44:31
|
Those arbitrary mechanics existed in AD&D 1E. Paladins could lay on hands x/day or cure disease x/week, monks could do quivering palm x/day, etc. Countless magical items also have x/day restrictions, but at least these are "magic" and therefore not necessarily subject to "realistic" rules.
You can seriously bench 320lbs? |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4429 Posts |
Posted - 27 Dec 2011 : 12:53:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
Those arbitrary mechanics existed in AD&D 1E. Paladins could lay on hands x/day or cure disease x/week, monks could do quivering palm x/day, etc. Countless magical items also have x/day restrictions, but at least these are "magic" and therefore not necessarily subject to "realistic" rules.
Quivering Palm doesn't really sound magical in the slightest. And really, the idea of magic "running out" or you being "burned out" from channeling too much divine energy is likely the same idea of your muscles just not having any more juice. Your not going to be able to pull off the same stunts due to fatigue and thats probably the best/easiest explination of encounter/daily powers for 4E (or any other previous edition non-magical mechanic).
I mean, lets look at stunning fist, basically an all-out Punch that makes your opponent tremble and become confused and so forth. Why can't someone continue to do that all day long? Probably because it requires an extremely focused effort on the part of the attacker. It's not going to be 100% simulationist, but neither is Hit Points.
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
You can seriously bench 320lbs?
6 years ago, when I was playing football in College, yea without a doubt. Now, as I haven't been to the gym on a consistant basis, probably not. I did do 255lbs for 4 reps with 3 sets each earlier last week, so I'd probably put my 1-rep Max bench weight at somwhere near 290-300lbs. I normally don't have someone spotting me, so I'd rather not try it least I can't get the bar up and it crushes me, lol. |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7969 Posts |
Posted - 27 Dec 2011 : 13:15:13
|
| 1E quivering palm was basically a blend of mystical Shaolin martial arts mastery with concentrated psionic ki power. It wasn't actually described very well, beyond being an overkill smashing destruction death-touch. Only available to monks of the very highest level who had attained physical, mental, and spiritual perfection after years of discipline ... in 1E monks (and assassins and druids) had to fight their way up the ranks, there was literally only one guy in the world at any given time who could use this power. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4429 Posts |
Posted - 27 Dec 2011 : 13:59:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
1E quivering palm was basically a blend of mystical Shaolin martial arts mastery with concentrated psionic ki power. It wasn't actually described very well, beyond being an overkill smashing destruction death-touch. Only available to monks of the very highest level who had attained physical, mental, and spiritual perfection after years of discipline ... in 1E monks (and assassins and druids) had to fight their way up the ranks, there was literally only one guy in the world at any given time who could use this power.
Sounds interesting. And death-touch attacks that instantly kill should be pretty high (almost unattainable) sort of things characters achieve at their character's pinnicle. I get what your saying, that these sorts of aspects are unique, rare, and hard to achieve so it's ok for them to be a bit more un-realistic in design than say a 1st level fighter (or ranger, rogue) making an attack that's rather unorthodox or unique (like how Daily powers are explained).
This system definitly benefits from those with a more narrative mindset than one rooted in simulation. For example, the Fighter daily exploit "Knee Breaker" allows you to slow an opponent with an attack. If they're already slowed, they become immobilized (meaning they can't move). This, I take it, is a lucky-shot to a creature's Knee, leg, or other appendage that helps them move about. If they're an ooze, maybe it's an attack right on top of their body, which squishes them to the ground and slows them down. The reason this attack couldn't be done a second time is, perhaps the creature is ready for another such attack or doesn't leave that gap in their defense open again. Or perhaps it was so strong that it literally leaves my character a bit breathless or makes him lag a bit.
Regardless, I'd leave it up to the player to explain or describe such an attack and hope they make it sound really interesting. This is one of those cinematic feels I believe the designers were going for, and I've found that it's a really interesting one. Heck, you could even tie in different aspects of your roleplaying into the mix. Say your Dwarven Fighter used Knee Breaker, and as his old bones recover from dishing out a menacing attack, it's just taken him awhile to recover from the over-use of Strength which would result in more grumbling and quotes like "Back in my day...!" |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2384 Posts |
Posted - 05 Jan 2012 : 14:24:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
IMHO, "daily powers" is one of the most cringeworthy parts. It's usually okay with magic, but otherwise looks... say... no better than if a thief would be able to pick pockets only 3/day.
Be that as it may, no worse than Stunning Fist X/day or the other 500 other X/day aspects of 3E.
And it was already bad enough, without hanging everything on those utility belts.
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
I don't really see the AEDU mechanic (at-will/encounter/daily/utiliy) as abstract as others do. Realistically, I could Bench Press 320lbs., but to do that successfully more than once per day is highly unlikely. Apply those same physics to Fighting or Combat Maneuvers
Now add two dozen of such things, each of which is so tough it can't be done more than 1/day, but at the same time they don't interfere with each other at all - and that quickly starts to look silly.
Conversely, overexertion as such is trivial to handle without any utility belts - e.g. "+1 level of encumberance until full rest" or "N Fatigue Points [not recovered until full rest]" for PO. Note how either approach doesn't allow one to retain peak swimming, fencing and whatever performance right after maximum bench press.
And of course a lot of N/day things don't involve physical effort. Also, N grows with level, and very selective as to in what class. So it's a pure game-balance measure - and badly done at that.
Memorization of Vancian magic and recharging items are the only places when strict N/day have in-universe sense. And even there it can and sometimes needs to be explicitly modeled through an extensive resource - spell points, for example. The utility belt approach is not very flexible.
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
And of course the layout is really rather uninteresting and could've gained ALOT more support with older, more "Classic" looks of the 3E and prior books with the "weathered parchment" layout.
Er... What it's about?
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
As to 4E mechanics and Realms continunity, elves being Eladrin (in Mechanics only) is probably the only real change that would effect the story/setting material by any means. Everything else is, as they say "Easy Peasy".
Depends on what to compare. For things done looking over one shoulder at a different model, some replacement can be found, but it's still a replacement. And for modeling from scratch the core built more and more around Miniature Game MUD concepts doesn't help - even if it wasn't interspersed with pearls like Bear Lore and Bloody Path. I'm not saying that nails can't be driven in with a footstool, but hold that it's a suboptimal solution. |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
2nd edition forever
