Gamasutra Article
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Journeyman
- Posts: 145
- Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:40 pm
Gamasutra Article
Discussion of Good Ideas from 4E
Found the link from one of PR's sad little threads. For your reading pleasure. Some interesting comments, some downright odd ones.
Found the link from one of PR's sad little threads. For your reading pleasure. Some interesting comments, some downright odd ones.
That thing mentions something I've noticed in alot of commentary. In almost every example of official people mentioning actions the players want to do that aren't covered by the rules, they bring up "swing from a chandelier". I see that example soo freaking often, I truly have to wonder why that particular activity never gets a rule. Swinging from a chandelier is almost iconic, just from examples of holes in their system alone, and yet they never think "maybe I should actually make a rule for it".
Last edited by virgil on Thu Aug 14, 2008 7:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Come see Sprockets & Serials
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
EXPLOSIVE RUNES!
Especially when it just needs to be a sidebar marked 'Optional Rule: Action stunts'
Coming up with a cool 'action stunt' associated with whatever it is you are doing (such as swinging from the chandliers, grabbing the bunjee cord attacked to the attack helicopter and swinging to the next building, whatever) that meets with general approval gives you a +2 on whatever it is you are doing.
Coming up with a cool 'action stunt' associated with whatever it is you are doing (such as swinging from the chandliers, grabbing the bunjee cord attacked to the attack helicopter and swinging to the next building, whatever) that meets with general approval gives you a +2 on whatever it is you are doing.
- CatharzGodfoot
- King
- Posts: 5668
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: North Carolina
'Swinging on something attack' is generally just using terrain to perform a charge over difficult terrain.
The law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from stealing bread, begging and sleeping under bridges.
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
We need objective rules that allow the use of something that you can swing on as part of your movement, which covers both terrain crossing and attacking from a chandelier, rather than saying "we don't feel like making rules for it, have some half thought guidelines" like I frequently see in books.
I can agree that players are potentially able to think of more actions that thematically work but aren't precisely covered by the rules, and thus guidelines for 'stunts'. However, the specific action of 'swinging' has been cited often enough that it should've gotten a ruling by now
I can agree that players are potentially able to think of more actions that thematically work but aren't precisely covered by the rules, and thus guidelines for 'stunts'. However, the specific action of 'swinging' has been cited often enough that it should've gotten a ruling by now
Last edited by virgil on Fri Aug 15, 2008 8:37 am, edited 2 times in total.
Come see Sprockets & Serials
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
EXPLOSIVE RUNES!
Why not just do it as Catharz, having a swing action count as part of a movement but make it a partial charge within the movement.
So if Lao Tzu the Monk has 60 speed and has to get across the second floor of the tavern by using the 20 ft hallway at first and then the chandelier hanging over the 15 ft spike trap (no reason) in the middle and then the hallway again to reach his dreaded enemy Confucious the drunken scholar then just let him make a simple jump check to get towards the chandelier (which we say he makes because he has the speed) and then the partial charge in the middle gives him a +2 to his attack.
If there isn't an attack action involved, just have it be fluff. It is cool.
So if Lao Tzu the Monk has 60 speed and has to get across the second floor of the tavern by using the 20 ft hallway at first and then the chandelier hanging over the 15 ft spike trap (no reason) in the middle and then the hallway again to reach his dreaded enemy Confucious the drunken scholar then just let him make a simple jump check to get towards the chandelier (which we say he makes because he has the speed) and then the partial charge in the middle gives him a +2 to his attack.
If there isn't an attack action involved, just have it be fluff. It is cool.
Ancient History wrote:We were working on Street Magic, and Frank asked me if a houngan had run over my dog.
Attacking's considered cool too, you know? I.e., non-attacks can unbalance a game just fine - any need you have for rules' is a need, period. But that could just be: "Charging over difficult terrain: roll Tumble against DC [insert number here]. Make something up." And have it be written in the rules, with a retarded chandelier example.A_Cynic wrote:If there isn't an attack action involved, just have it be fluff. It is cool.
Last edited by Bigode on Fri Aug 15, 2008 7:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Hans Freyer, s.b.u.h. wrote:A manly, a bold tone prevails in history. He who has the grip has the booty.
Huston Smith wrote:Life gives us no view of the whole. We see only snatches here and there, (...)
brotherfrancis75 wrote:Perhaps you imagine that Ayn Rand is our friend? And the Mont Pelerin Society? No, those are but the more subtle versions of the Bolshevik Communist Revolution you imagine you reject. (...) FOX NEWS IS ALSO COMMUNIST!
LDSChristian wrote:True. I do wonder which is worse: killing so many people like Hitler did or denying Christ 3 times like Peter did.
Of course, attacking is cool. I'm just being too quick and not very careful in checking my posts recently. I just meant it is cool in the sense of 'it's A-OK'Bigode wrote:Attacking's considered cool too, you know? I.e., non-attacks can unbalance a game just fine - any need you have for rules' is a need, period. But that could just be: "Charging over difficult terrain: roll Tumble against DC [insert number here]. Make something up." And have it be written in the rules, with a retarded chandelier example.A_Cynic wrote:If there isn't an attack action involved, just have it be fluff. It is cool.
~
But, yes, that works as well.
I just invented a more obtuse mechanism because virgileso wanted a specific mechanism rather than something existing.
It was rough, bad, and silly. I rescind it. I'll leave it up and watch the hilarity ensue.
Ancient History wrote:We were working on Street Magic, and Frank asked me if a houngan had run over my dog.
If by that you mean one can just say "whatever", you're wrong; if non-attacks were silly little flavor considerations, the 3.5 fighter would be a great class ... though now it becomes clearer why it is to some people (not meant to include you, though) ...A_Cynic wrote:Of course, attacking is cool. I'm just being too quick and not very careful in checking my posts recently. I just meant it is cool in the sense of 'it's A-OK'
Hans Freyer, s.b.u.h. wrote:A manly, a bold tone prevails in history. He who has the grip has the booty.
Huston Smith wrote:Life gives us no view of the whole. We see only snatches here and there, (...)
brotherfrancis75 wrote:Perhaps you imagine that Ayn Rand is our friend? And the Mont Pelerin Society? No, those are but the more subtle versions of the Bolshevik Communist Revolution you imagine you reject. (...) FOX NEWS IS ALSO COMMUNIST!
LDSChristian wrote:True. I do wonder which is worse: killing so many people like Hitler did or denying Christ 3 times like Peter did.
Okay, fine, I'm going about it in a wrong way. I'm just rushing up the hill and just bumbling about and not really clarifying any of the information I'm trying to get out.
So let's try to extrapolate some information first.
Virgileso, bigode, whoever the fvck else...
What are the primary/secondary purposes for the 'action stunt' swinging by use of chandelier, lariat, etc...?
So let's try to extrapolate some information first.
Virgileso, bigode, whoever the fvck else...
What are the primary/secondary purposes for the 'action stunt' swinging by use of chandelier, lariat, etc...?
Ancient History wrote:We were working on Street Magic, and Frank asked me if a houngan had run over my dog.
Not sure whether you ask about in-game or metagame, but the latter's the only one I'd care about: debunk the classic (and retarded) defense of EBD, namely "You can't foresee everything; what about chandeliers?" - so fvcking write whatever rules for what you want in the book, and then start worrying about the real rare stuff instead of going for not having a system at all.A_Cynic wrote:What are the primary/secondary purposes for the 'action stunt' swinging by use of chandelier, lariat, etc...?
Hans Freyer, s.b.u.h. wrote:A manly, a bold tone prevails in history. He who has the grip has the booty.
Huston Smith wrote:Life gives us no view of the whole. We see only snatches here and there, (...)
brotherfrancis75 wrote:Perhaps you imagine that Ayn Rand is our friend? And the Mont Pelerin Society? No, those are but the more subtle versions of the Bolshevik Communist Revolution you imagine you reject. (...) FOX NEWS IS ALSO COMMUNIST!
LDSChristian wrote:True. I do wonder which is worse: killing so many people like Hitler did or denying Christ 3 times like Peter did.