Changes For Fiends and Rich Baker

[Voss]

I don't see that one. The other saves look like they are being used instead of AC, not in addition to. I could be wrong, but re-reading, I don't see it.

[JonSetanta]

Ah maybe I misunderstood it. Perhaps there's a thread on Wiz about that.

[Crissa]

The Saves-as-AC model is just as valid as the Spells-as-DC model.

It just seems sorta silly to be rolling to hit with something you have a limited number of, though. And how do you roll 'to hit' area effects and such? Many - maybe most on my list - don't have a roll until someone else bumps into them.

-Crissa

[Voss]

Well, with damaging area spells, if you miss a critter, you do half damage.
Limits are also going to be different. Various spells and abilities are going to be changed so every class has at will, per encounter and per day abilities. If they're smart about it, any damaging effect will be in the at will or per encounter zone, because that sort of stuff has few balance issues. Level appropriate damage all day long isn't much of an issue.

Also, a lot of spells and whatnot are changing. There are apparently going to be 25+ spell levels (probably 30, corresponding to class levels, but for some reason I've only seen the number 25+ bandied about). So lots of things are moving, including when characters get it.

As for area effects... its still unclear. Could be a set value, a single roll you make and note down when you cast or you roll whenever someone bumps it. I could see arguments for any of the 3, though the set value would suck the most (since it would be easy to cheese an evasion style character that could bump his (reflex?) score enough that he's simply immune to area effects, all the time).

[JonSetanta]

I still like the idea of both evading a physical blow and a spell area as being the same fuckin roll and bonus.
It make too much sense to not be.
I'm still shocked it hasn't been like this so far in 3.5.

And even better, I still meet gamers that argue fervently the reasons why this shouldn't be. They don't even do it logically; it's more of a "I'm louder so I'm right" kind of geekfest.
Yet, I'd bet money they change their mind as soon as they begin playing 4e as if nothing was ever different.

Yes I love the game but absolutely hate (some of) the players.

[Koumei]

Well, clearly we should have saving throws against Death, Poison, Petrification, Breath Weapons, Spells, Wands and Your Mum.

[Cielingcat]

1191865133[/unixtime]]And even better, I still meet gamers that argue fervently the reasons why this shouldn't be. They don't even do it logically; it's more of a "I'm louder so I'm right" kind of geekfest

You talk like any argument between nerds goes any differently.

[JonSetanta]

1191865588[/unixtime]]

1191865133[/unixtime]]And even better, I still meet gamers that argue fervently the reasons why this shouldn't be. They don't even do it logically; it's more of a "I'm louder so I'm right" kind of geekfest

You talk like any argument between nerds goes any differently.

I've had funny arguments, and goofy arguments. Wise ones, smart ones, quick ones, angry ones, and ehhhh ones.

But the obnoxious OCD geeks that spring up sometimes in hobby stores, butting into other previously mentioned decent discussion types, insisting they are right without any form of backup or repartee and instead relying on a serious case of "Argumentum ad baculum", just incite an urge to do some gut punches and face-stomping.
And that won't get us anywhere.

Sure, we're all losers in that topic, but one can at least discuss geekdom with a little humility. Or some antipsychotics.

[Draco_Argentum]

1191651716[/unixtime]]I don't know, pick a random religion and steal their Celestials.

Celestials from real world religion do resemble furries. Unfortunately they resemble the batshit insane ones that are hybrids of about five things, have excess limbs and usually a bunch of wings. Oh and their head is randomly wreathed in flame. Cause flames are cool and wreathed is a neat word.

About the action resolution mechanism. Making everything opposed d20 rolls appears to be consistent with what they said. Sounds like a good idea if thats what they do. Of course thats going to be more rolls pretty often so I'm still not sure where they'll be saving time each round. Right now it looks like one round will take frigging ages.

[Koumei]

1192021235[/unixtime]]
Celestials from real world religion do resemble furries. Unfortunately they resemble the batshit insane ones that are hybrids of about five things, have excess limbs and usually a bunch of wings. Oh and their head is randomly wreathed in flame. Cause flames are cool and wreathed is a neat word.

Yeah, but that's leaving furry territory and entering "Holy shit! Take anything you want, just please don't hit my face!" region.

[Voss]

1192021235[/unixtime]]
About the action resolution mechanism. Making everything opposed d20 rolls appears to be consistent with what they said. Sounds like a good idea if thats what they do. Of course thats going to be more rolls pretty often so I'm still not sure where they'll be saving time each round. Right now it looks like one round will take frigging ages.

Wait... Rolls aren't going to be opposed d20 rolls. Saves, AC and etc are going to be static (for a given level) and if you beat it, you hit (do full damage with blast spells, etc).

The time saving comes in from something like fireball- you toss it at 12 orcs, the DM compares your 1 roll to their reflex scores (whatever that number is or those numbers are, if they're orcs with different roles), and they take X or X/2 damage, rathering than the current model of you cast, and the DM makes 12 individual rolls for the orcs.

[Koumei]

These days, your average DM who isn't using a PC with an automatic dice roller just rolls once for all of them. If you're casting Sleep on groups of enemies with low Will saves, this can really suck.

[Voss]

I've never met an 'average DM' then.

The thing about it sucking, is it easily sucks for both sides. If they 'group fail' against sleep, then there isn't really a combat, and if they 'group succeeed', then there wasn't any point in casting the spell.

[Koumei]

I've seen it happen, but considering the rarity of large groups of enemies *shrug*

In one game, I was playing a Beguiler and nearly all the encounters were groups of goblins. The half-ogre (custom version) would just throw tables, killing large areas of them, and I would generally just use Sleep or Whelming Burst. They collectively needed a natural 20 to pass the Will save.

They collectively failed every time.

[JonSetanta]

If fairly affluent, the DM could use a bunch of d20s. Like 5+ at a time, then multiply results for the rest of the monster group.

Or, "take 10" on their saves. haha

And what's an ogre doing throwing tables at goblins when it could be eating them instead?

[Koumei]

Well you see, gnomes don't eat goblins. And he was raised by gnomes, so he thinks he's a gnome.

"But you're huge!"
"Yeah. Mum says I'll grow out of it though."

[JonSetanta]

Ah like the 'fat elf' joke someone told me months ago. He had a 200+ lb elf PC.
His background was:
"The halflings found him as an orphan but didn't know what to do with him. So every time he cried, they said 'Feed it!'"

My wild elf Barbarian ate goblins though. Maybe I was just playing a wild elf to do something like that, don't know.
But on the plus side, you'll never need rations as long as you cook em well enough.
And... aren't.. uh. Lawful Good.

[Voss]

There isn't much inherently not-lawful or not-good about cannibalism. Its just a particular social taboo our society happens to have. As long as you aren't killing people just to eat them.

There is a lovely Calvin and Hobbes strip where he suggests that cannibalism be grounds for leniency in murder cases as its less wasteful.