Quote from: Sacrosanct;630919WTF is up with the complete failure of reading comprehension around here?

It's the Internet?

Quote from: Sacrosanct;630919WTF is up with the complete failure of reading comprehension around here?

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;630971It's the Internet?

No, it is just Sommerjon and Mistwell, 4rons to the core.

Quote from: Mistwell;630911To be fair, when he said "Your side is making a fundamental mistake, you think 1e is basic and streamlined," that was definitely responsive to what you said.  In fact, it goes to the heart of much or what you said.  Probably best to respond to it.

It's a dumb statement to the core, because to my knowledge, nobody's ever said that 1e is "basic and streamlined." Potentially easy on new players who wouldn't have to deal with the bulk of the rules IF the DM adjudicates behind the screen? Yes.

But "basic and streamlined" for the DM, especially the new DM? Fuck no.

Quick question here: did you guys see the mention of "Advanced" in big white letters on the cover? That's in the actual title of the game, I believe. Well. You need more explanation than that, or are you really that fundamentally dumb? The "basic" game of "Advanced Dungeons & Dragons" is Holmes D&D, the blue box (and OD&D). And "Advanced" is not "streamlined", not in the way most modern gamers would think of the word, anyway. It's a toolbox, it's full of options and subsystems to pick and choose from and consider carefully before coming up with your own stuff for your own game as the referee.

It's "Advanced," for God's sakes.

And you call that kind of absolutely stupid misrepresentation something that "goes to the heart of much of what you said?" I mean, seriously? What the fuck is this? Seriously.

Quote from: mcbobbo;630895It is possible to imagine a cleric that isn't a heal-bot, even in basic.

Absolutely. The funny thing is, it exists. It's called "a cleric". I'm sure you've heard of those. Now if you make abstraction of the noise you hear on internet forums that keep calling the cleric "healbot", maybe you'll realize that's far from summarizing what actual clerics do in the game, by any stretch of the imagination, ever since the class existed in OD&D.

Quote from: jeff37923;630987No, it is just Sommerjon and Mistwell, 4rons to the core.

OK, that's hilarious.  You know 4e is not my preferred edition, right? Or, have you mistaken me for someone else?

Jeff, sometimes you're really fucking lazy.

Quote from: Benoist;630996It's a dumb statement to the core, because to my knowledge, nobody's ever said that 1e is "basic and streamlined." Potentially easy on new players who wouldn't have to deal with the bulk of the rules IF the DM adjudicates behind the screen? Yes.

But "basic and streamlined" for the DM, especially the new DM? Fuck no.

Quick question here: did you guys see the mention of "Advanced" in big white letters on the cover? That's in the actual title of the game, I believe. Well. You need more explanation than that, or are you really that fundamentally dumb? The "basic" game of "Advanced Dungeons & Dragons" is Holmes D&D, the blue box (and OD&D). And "Advanced" is not "streamlined", not in the way most modern gamers would think of the word, anyway. It's a toolbox, it's full of options and subsystems to pick and choose from and consider carefully before coming up with your own stuff for your own game as the referee.

It's "Advanced," for God's sakes.

And you call that kind of absolutely stupid misrepresentation something that "goes to the heart of much of what you said?" I mean, seriously? What the fuck is this? Seriously.

Overreact much?

Benoist, I did not say I agreed with his retort, I said nobody had responded to it, and it was a response worth dealing with.

You can strawman me now for all you like.  Go ahead, pretend I have I side in this, and advocated for something, if it makes you feel better.  These kinds of threads, sadly, tend to bring out the worst in your personality.  When you get like this, everyone's an enemy who isn't 100% agreeing with what you say, and the nasty fucker that hides inside you comes out.

So yeah, go ahead, pound that table.  Maybe you should call me names now too, if that's what's necessary to get you to come down off the ledge again.

Quote from: Mistwell;631003Overreact much?

Look at this: !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You see those exclamation points? It took me literally zero effort to type them, and I wasn't foaming at the mouth when I held the key. So please, don't overstate the quality of my reaction either. Thank you.

Quote from: Mistwell;631003Benoist, I did not say I agreed with his retort, I said nobody had responded to it, and it was a response worth dealing with.

You can strawman me now for all you like.  Go ahead, pretend I have I side in this, and advocated for something, if it makes you feel better.

Well you haven't pointed out whether you agreed or not. The only thing you said was that to you it seemed to "go to the heart of everything you said", and I'd say that's giving the original statement a lot more weight that it deserves. It was a stupid statement. A statement that's not even worth responding to. The fact you took it as "well, you got to answer it because it seems serious" just made me drop my jaw to the floor (it's a figure of speech now, don't be dumb). How can this statement look like anything serious to you? Seriously?

Quote from: Mistwell;631003When you get like this, everyone's an enemy who isn't 100% agreeing with what you say, and the nasty fucker that hides inside you comes out.

So yeah, go ahead, pound that table.  Maybe you should call me names now too, if that's what's necessary to get you to come down off the ledge again.

Aw stop it, drama queen. We ain't there yet.

Quote from: Benoist;631004Well you haven't pointed out whether you agreed or not. The only thing you said was that to you it seemed to "go to the heart of everything you said", and I'd say that's giving the original statement a lot more weight that it deserves. It was a stupid statement. A statement that's not even worth responding to.

It wasn't so much this as it was it had nothing to do with what I (we) were talking about.  

We were talking about B/X in comparison to Next's Basic version, and why it needed to be streamlined.  We weren't talking about 1e in that context, let alone did anyone claim that we thought 1e was streamlined.  Just another example of Sommerjon not actually responding to what people are saying.

Yeah, it's got fuck all to do with what we were talking about. So "goes to the heart of what you said" ... WTF?

Quote from: Sacrosanct;630498Maybe it's me.  Maybe how I explained the difference doesn't make any sense at all.  Everyone else, was I incomprehensible?

Quote from: Sommerjon;630883An appeal to emotion?  Really?

The one doesn't lead to the other.  ESL, stupidity, or just plain intentionally obtuse?  You make the call, folks.

Quote from: Mistwell;631002OK, that's hilarious.  You know 4e is not my preferred edition, right? Or, have you mistaken me for someone else?

Jeff, sometimes you're really fucking lazy.

Neither you nor Sommerjon require a whole lot of effort.

Fundamentally, any question of preference aside, it is easier to start with the more conservative rules, and then add more options to them; than it is to start with the more permissive rules and then try to modify the system backward into simplicity.
That's what its all about.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;631565Fundamentally, any question of preference aside, it is easier to start with the more conservative rules, and then add more options to them; than it is to start with the more permissive rules and then try to modify the system backward into simplicity.
That's what its all about.

RPGPundit

Yes but you would admit that there is no difference in simplicity between

i) gain level Hit points per day from healing
ii) gain level HP per hour from healing

The two rules are not divided by compexity versus simplicity they are divided by the difference they effect in play style.

So in this case it's an argument between play styles, and logic and simplicity are moot.

Now if you were to say we took a survey and more people want HP/day than HP/hour then it would be logical to support that play style as you get more customers. However, you would still expect people that wanted the other type to complain just as traditionalists complained throughout 4e because it is a playstyle/commercial decision. that is what I was trying to get at with my original post and I stated as much very clearly.

Interestingly once you opt to go to HP/day you actually have to introduce a lot more stuff to support actual play. Which is why you have clerical healing, healing potions, wands of healing etc etc in the first place.
For me as I noted one of my real gripes is the way a requirement for magical healing results in a lot more magic inherent in the system. So if I want to try and get to a S&S feel where magic is rare and dangerous and fantastic its much harder.

Dude, bullshit.

Timekeeping a day is far easier than timekeeping hours, especially in a game that runs off of rounds (anywhere from 1 minute to 6 seconds) and turns (10 minutes, a.k.a. the middling red-headed stepchild of time keeping). Keeping time outside of combat becomes an intense turn accounting affair in dungeons and generally nebulous during roleplay in peaceful areas. What you are asking is to default with another middle measure for intensive accounting continuously throughout play -- because with HP everyone has skin in the game, and they will want every last point --  and let people unwind that knot into something simpler if they cannot stand it.

That is needlessly convoluted for teaching and utter shite for KISS design. There is an obvious difference in simplicity.

The answer is, 'NO.'

What's next, fractions of an HP? These are games ran by people, ideally at a table, for relaxation, not games ran by microprocessors with nothing better to do. Leave to video games things they will always be best in.