Quote from: Malleus ArianorumWhat this article says is that henceforth a single lucky roll can't kill the PCs. So instead of having a chance to desicively slay PCs outright, they'll just get an extra bit of damage now and then.

Unless it says it somewhere that wasn't quoted in this thread, the article doesn't say that at all.

Quote from: James McMurrayUnless it says it somewhere that wasn't quoted in this thread, the article doesn't say that at all.

It doesn't say it outright, but I think it hints strongly at it, in that it argues for a different outcome for effects aside from death, probably in HP or ability damage. I think the statement is strange because I think it should also be an argument against critical hits, but they have no problem with those.

Lets look at the statement again:

QuoteEver faced one of those life-or-death saving throws? Hours, weeks, or even years of play can hang in the balance. It all comes down to that one roll. There’s drama in that moment, but it’s drama you didn’t create, and you don’t want.

To clarify, I think their statement against save or die situations being arbitrary or unintentional is baloney for two reasons:

1) The DM is the person responsible for setting up most of these situations. They should know if the poison is save or die or about some creature's fatal special abilities. Unless they're being dicks, which does happen but has nothing to do with the rules, this is far from arbitrary or unintentional.

2)Though it doesn't refer to it, in my experiences, a far more arbitrary and unintentional cause of death in a D&D game is through criticals. And for some reason they seem to love those so much that from what I remember, the crit threat rule is being dropped, and now spells can crit too.

They should not be afraid to include deadly stuff in the rules, I hope have massive damage in the book, and toss in some fatal poisons and creature powers to boot.

So, they're keeping armor-which-makes-you-harder-to-hit ? That's too bad. If there's a sacred cow I'd gladly make chili of, it's this one. Using reflex save/defence to avoid blows would have been a nice bit of streamlining...
Plus, what Cab said about playing smart and fixing problems who do not appear in practice.

Quote from: JamesVIt doesn't say it outright, but I think it hints strongly at it, in that it argues for a different outcome for effects aside from death, probably in HP or ability damage. I think the statement is strange because I think it should also be an argument against critical hits, but they have no problem with those.

It looks like they're losing save or die, but (as with crits) not losing effects that can instantly kill you. I like that. Even if all they do is make the save or die spells drop you to -1 instead of -10, I'd be happy.

Quote from: Weekly...playing smart and fixing problems who do not appear in practice.

Yeah, as best I can tell D&D 4e is trying to outhackmaster Hackmaster (or outrifts Rifts) by making the game all about KEWL POWERZ!?!! and oneupmanship from the players showing them off like some kind of "D&D Idol".

The worst part is - games like Hackmaster and Rifts at least turn the dial up to 11 on opponents/threats as well as characters so they do take some more thought to them than a lot of people give the games credit for (or you end up with piles of dead PCs).  It seems like D&D 4e is all about creating uber-PCs that can just shred their way through everything mindlessly.

Crits make the game harder for PCs because the DM makes more attack rolls, and therefore has more chances to get a crit on the PCs. Meanwhile, they extend the attack options of PCs who carefully exploit the potential of crits. I approve.

Also, it should be pointed out to everyone complaining about spells doing crits that Ray Mages in 3.x can already do critical hits with their spells.

I like what I see from this article.

I've become a fan of the "Actor Rolls" mechanic of SWSE, and I love the disambiguation between Reflex Saves and Touch Attacks.  Bravo, guys.

I also like that they're taking AC into account and making it separate from Reflex.  SWSE basically leaves armor for extreme specialists (as, genre-wise, it should), while D&D expects armor.

-O

James,
   Ever faced one of those life-or-death saving throws? Hours, weeks, or even years of play can hang in the balance. It all comes down to that one roll. There's drama in that moment, but it's drama you didn't create, and you don't want.

That's gone in the new edition.
From that I understand that the "drama in that moment" when "it all comes down to that one roll" is "gone in the new edition."

Quote from: WeeklySo, they're keeping armor-which-makes-you-harder-to-hit ? That's too bad. If there's a sacred cow I'd gladly make chili of, it's this one. Using reflex save/defence to avoid blows would have been a nice bit of streamlining...
Plus, what Cab said about playing smart and fixing problems who do not appear in practice.

Armor doesn't do that...it makes it harder for you to take damage....just as it always has.

Quote from: KrakaJakArmor doesn't do that...it makes it harder for you to take damage....just as it always has.

Obryn approves this message.

When you're using an abstraction like "hit points" rather than specific bodily injuries, you need to take both attack & damage rolls into account.  Armor does, indeed, reduce the amount of damage you take when interpreted in that light.

-O

I like save or die effects, even as a player.

Quote from: jrientsI like save or die effects, even as a player.

And I never liked them, even as a GM.

I particularly like Save-or-Die situations when the player knows the risk, and chooses to take it.  

Save-or-Die is also no less fair than a situation that can deal more damage than the player has hit points.  The poison needle trap is no less lethal to the 1st level thief than the pit trap, or the Orc spear.    Possibly more fair depending on how many d6 damage the trap causes!  In fact, with Save-or-Die it lets the player make the roll so could be seen as MORE fair than the GM rolling some dice and announcing the character has fallen down a pit and died.

Quote from: Malleus ArianorumJames,
   Ever faced one of those life-or-death saving throws? Hours, weeks, or even years of play can hang in the balance. It all comes down to that one roll. There's drama in that moment, but it's drama you didn't create, and you don't want.

That's gone in the new edition.
From that I understand that the "drama in that moment" when "it all comes down to that one roll" is "gone in the new edition."

The part that really stood out for me was "it's drama you didn't create, and you don't want."

I read this as acknowledgment that once in a while you get hosed by the dice, and although it's a nail-biter, it's not a lot of fun. Although I don't see how the new mechanics they discuss really deal with giving players drama that they want.

The 4e blogs keep us telling what is/was un-fun. Could they pretty please tell us what actually IS fun in D&D?

I still don´t really grasp their idea of "fun with D&D".

Honestly.