How about the ritual that made a zombie minion with super strength that couldn't punch people? That was crap too.Archmage wrote:This was actually the ritual that broke 4e for me--the fact that you could make an animal larger, improving its strength, and it only affected its carrying capacity and not how hard it would hurt when it hit you in the face. Because it's not like carrying capacity and damage inflicted with physical strikes are both based on "ability to exert force" or anything.CapnTthePirateG wrote: You can grow a beast which doesn't buff it in combat.
OSSR: 4e Arcane Power
Moderator: Moderators
-
CapnTthePirateG
- Duke
- Posts: 1545
- Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:07 am
OgreBattle wrote:"And thus the denizens learned that hating Shadzar was the only thing they had in common, and with him gone they turned their venom upon each other"
-Sarpadian Empires, vol. I
-
Lago PARANOIA
- Invincible Overlord
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am
4E D&D apparently felt that no player-enabled affect should:
A.) Have a permanent effect.
B.) Last longer than 5 minutes without expending discrete charges.
C.) Affect anything from a distance larger than 20 squares (100 feet)
D.) Happen in a timeframe quicker than 1 minute.
And/or
E.) Produce a directly or indirectly (such as raising an ally or building a rampant) adversarial effect that is not the generic equal of Spider-Man punching a dude.
Unless it came with some permanent cost. And for three or more things on that list? It shouldn't be in the game at fucking all.
That design philosophy completely broke 4E D&D for me. Even more so than the treasure parcel and skill challenge system. I was willing to overlook the fact that the game had nothing outside of Magic Tea Party, but I was not willing to overlook the fact that the Magic Tea Party could not be conducted with any dresses more elaborate than sackcloth and the tea would be microwaved Brisk.
A.) Have a permanent effect.
B.) Last longer than 5 minutes without expending discrete charges.
C.) Affect anything from a distance larger than 20 squares (100 feet)
D.) Happen in a timeframe quicker than 1 minute.
And/or
E.) Produce a directly or indirectly (such as raising an ally or building a rampant) adversarial effect that is not the generic equal of Spider-Man punching a dude.
Unless it came with some permanent cost. And for three or more things on that list? It shouldn't be in the game at fucking all.
That design philosophy completely broke 4E D&D for me. Even more so than the treasure parcel and skill challenge system. I was willing to overlook the fact that the game had nothing outside of Magic Tea Party, but I was not willing to overlook the fact that the Magic Tea Party could not be conducted with any dresses more elaborate than sackcloth and the tea would be microwaved Brisk.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.