Quote from: Acta Est Fabula;528527I see your 1000 and raise you 10000.  

The way it was explained in TBP by 4e fans was that having those powers limited to per encounter/whatever was because it was a guaranteed attempt, not that you were necessarily limited to x times per encounter, just that you were assured success when you chose.

And I suppose my answer to that is, "Ok, then I can attempt my spinning hook kick more than once per encounter?"

"Well...no...but...you see..."

But that's the not how it works, only can you not attempt a certain maneuver more than once but you can miss on it also for the double suckitude whammy.

I get limits on certain abilities if there's a rational explanation for it.

Magic is limited by inner potential. A physical body can only channel so much magical energy before requiring rest.

Barbarian Rage, similar idea. It's draining, physically taxing to perform, and thus limited by physical potential.

Doing a special roundhouse kick? That's silly, especially if said attack misses. This is a mundane action that can not be limited through any rational means other than "That's how the game works" which makes it feel like a video game.

Quote from: taknight;528551I get limits on certain abilities if there's a rational explanation for it.

Magic is limited by inner potential. A physical body can only channel so much magical energy before requiring rest.

Barbarian Rage, similar idea. It's draining, physically taxing to perform, and thus limited by physical potential.

Doing a special roundhouse kick? That's silly, especially if said attack misses. This is a mundane action that can not be limited through any rational means other than "That's how the game works" which makes it feel like a video game.

Give the man a gold star! Seriously, it's why I hate ADEU both because it it takes away all versatility for magic using classes and makes no sense for martial classes.  At this very moment on TBP I am arguing the magic user part and they think I'm talking about power level when I'm actually talking about the absolute rigidity of the scheme and removal of the old flexibility and versatility of pre ADEU seperate from the issue of pure power (which is easy to fix imo) .

The other part of that argument that really makes no sense is the "MUs have these super powerful spells.  By the time a MU gets fireball (think 1e or 2e), he/she is outshines the fighter by miles!  I mean, that's 5d6 hp worth of damage!"

Well, yeah, for a single attack, the MU can deal out the most damage.  But that completely ignores the fact that once that spell is cast, the MU is done while the fighter is dealing out damage with every hit, all day long.  Not to mention the risk of miscasting the spell and having a single attack being able to kill the character in one shot.  The only way that argument makes even a little sense is if you reset the MUs spells after every combat encounter.  And in that case, blame the way you play the game, not the class.

Quote from: taknight;528551I get limits on certain abilities if there's a rational explanation for it.

Magic is limited by inner potential. A physical body can only channel so much magical energy before requiring rest.

Barbarian Rage, similar idea. It's draining, physically taxing to perform, and thus limited by physical potential.

Doing a special roundhouse kick? That's silly, especially if said attack misses. This is a mundane action that can not be limited through any rational means other than "That's how the game works" which makes it feel like a video game.

Yep, this is basically it for me too.

And by the way, hi everyone!

And could someone be a dear and tell me what "TBP" stands for?  Still haven't learned all the abbreviations by lurking.

Quote from: falcondawg;528577Yep, this is basically it for me too.

And by the way, hi everyone!

And could someone be a dear and tell me what "TBP" stands for?  Still haven't learned all the abbreviations by lurking.

Welcome to RPGsite falcondawg. TBP means The Big Purple otherwise known as RPG.net.

Quote from: Marleycat;528583Welcome to RPGsite falcondawg. TBP means The Big Purple otherwise known as RPG.net.

That's pretty funny.  I discovered this site recently because of a thread on that site.

Quote from: Marleycat;528560Give the man a gold star! Seriously, it's why I hate ADEU both because it it takes away all versatility for magic using classes and makes no sense for martial classes.  At this very moment on TBP I am arguing the magic user part and they think I'm talking about power level when I'm actually talking about the absolute rigidity of the scheme and removal of the old flexibility and versatility of pre ADEU seperate from the issue of pure power (which is easy to fix imo) .

Ohhh first day here, and already a gold star.

To me, I like the systems that rely on common sense, and I've been known on occasion to change or eliminate a rule that didn't make sense to me based on this assessment. Common sense wins over all.

Quote from: Marleycat;528583Welcome to RPGsite falcondawg. TBP means The Big Purple otherwise known as RPG.net.

Ahh... good to know. I had RPG.net following me on twitter at one time. They may still. Never spent any time there really. Thanks for the insight.

Quote from: taknight;528588Ahh... good to know. I had RPG.net following me on twitter at one time. They may still. Never spent any time there really. Thanks for the insight.

Well, you're now being quoted there by the forces of evil

http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?621683-D-amp-DNext-L-amp-L-D-amp-DNext-Design-Considerations/page7  

Quote from: thecasualoblivionI had an interesting thought in response to the parent article, after reading some Jeff Grubb comments in the following interview: http://thomasaknight.com/blog.php?id=38

Thinking of the above, combined with the L&L article, I can only conclude that the strong reasons for this edition change and what drives it are that it is a direct response to the edition wars. Given this, I think WotC is making a mistake towards the 4E side of things. They are working hard to address the concerns of AD&D and 3E players that came up during said edition wars, but are forgetting that 4E fans were knee deep in the edition war in a defensive sense, having to defend their game through all the relentless criticism of it. If they want 4E fans to buy into the 5E marketing, they are going to have to address 4E's relationship to the edition war(being reassuring and convincing them that D&D isn't being ruined, as opposed to trying to win back) in addition to trying to win back fans of earlier editions. This is something they most definitely have not been doing, and I think they'd be getting less criticism if they dealt with it.

You'd think people actually lost limbs and lives in Edition Wars, given the shellshock of it's veterans.

Quote from: taknight;528588Ahh... good to know. I had RPG.net following me on twitter at one time. They may still. Never spent any time there really. Thanks for the insight.

You'll fit in here then the TBP isn't held in high regard here generally.  There are exceptions and it does have some very good things.  Myself I am more middle ground about it than the majority here.  I'm active both here and there but I consider myself as "middle school" as opposed to new or old and I'm a heretic of the first order being a 2/3e lover and Dragonlance fan. You should stay away from me for your own safety, you have been warned.

Quote from: Marleycat;528594You'll fit in here then the TBP isn't held in high regard here generally.  There are exceptions and it does have some very good things.  Myself I am more middle ground about it than the majority here.  I'm active both here and there but I consider myself as "middle school" as opposed to new or old and I'm a heretic of the first order being a 2/3e lover and Dragonlance fan. You should stay away from me for your own safety, you have been warned.

I'm a near-20-year veteran gamer. (Yes, I've been playing since I was about 13...) I'm totally sold on 2ed/3ed. Most of my best characters are 2ed characters. I'm not really a fan of 4ed, but I like Pathfinder, and am looking at running a campaign in it.

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;528590Well, you're now being quoted there by the forces of evil

http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?621683-D-amp-DNext-L-amp-L-D-amp-DNext-Design-Considerations/page7  

Oh geez, gold stars, and now being quoted by the forces of evil? What next.

Thanks for the shout-out of course. It's always nice to see work I did almost two months ago getting this kind of replay value.

Quote from: taknight;528600I'm a near-20-year veteran gamer. (Yes, I've been playing since I was about 13...) I'm totally sold on 2ed/3ed. Most of my best characters are 2ed characters. I'm not really a fan of 4ed, but I like Pathfinder, and am looking at running a campaign in it.

I currently play Pathfinder and trying to find a game of Fantasy Craft, if I had more time I'd just run a game of FC, maybe I'll make the time when Spellbound finally comes out.  I like what Pathfinder did with Sorcerers, wish they would go further with the game overall but I like it anyway.  Maybe 5e will take a cue or three from both games though it seems they are so maybe I'll have no worries, we'll see.