• The Infractions Forum is available for public view. Please note that if you have been suspended you will need to open a private/incognito browser window to view it.

Search results

  1. T

    Mearls: Armour is not DR in 4th.

    I'm inclined to agree with this assessment. Also, manoeuvrability can be important, depending on the situation (and while plate doesn't turn the wearer into a plodding turtle, there is some effect on manoeuvrability). You probably don't want to outfit your city watch in heavy armour, because...
  2. T

    Mearls: Armour is not DR in 4th.

    Well, there's function and then there's function. You don't expect an armoured character to be as effective as an unarmoured character, all else being equal, do you? Are you wanting a light weapon just to be able to harm a character in armour, or should it be just as effective as a heavy weapon...
  3. T

    What are the "essential" cyberware in a cyberpunk game?

    Been done, for real. Caught a little of the camera-work on a medical TV show a decade or so back. Plus I've seen a few other interesting things in the way of video for medical education and/or research. Growing up with two doctors for parents, occasionally the assumption that last night's...
  4. T

    Mearls: Armour is not DR in 4th.

    Define "work convincingly". That challenge I made earlier wasn't directly solely at Sankarah. If you can work with me to come up with a set of tests to define your requires and tell whether a system satisfies you, I'm willing to put in the work to make the attempt. It'd be an exercise is...
  5. T

    Mearls: Armour is not DR in 4th.

    You need to know a system well enough. I'd say being able to comment, 'I'm not sure what "an inherent bonus book" is, unless you mean one of those magic books that increases an ability score,' is probably good enough. Thus making my point - you need to guess what sources provide an inherent...
  6. T

    Mearls: Armour is not DR in 4th.

    Yes, but a decent simulation of martial skill should work even when they aren't using those magical abilities. That's right. ACs are total crap because the entirety of defensive skill is represented by hit point increases. It's the flip side of the difficulty with hit points. I'd never want to...
  7. T

    Mearls: Armour is not DR in 4th.

    Or maybe you aren't familiar enough with the world outside your little bubble to have it. A good game has to be playable by a wide range of people. It isn't those who frequent the optimization boards that keep D&D alive, any more than it is the minimalists. The majority of players of any game...
  8. T

    Mearls: Armour is not DR in 4th.

    So without the magic (which I said long ago does scale), he starts at 1d10+6 (trading off, what, 3 damage for 2 points of AC? Or is it 6 damage for 2 AC). The high-level version is 2d6+17. Average has increased from 11.5 to 24 - a touch over double. While hit points have improved by a factor of...
  9. T

    Mearls: Armour is not DR in 4th.

    Okay, so without magic, you start with 2d6 (big weapon) + 3 (strength) + 1 (rage boost to strength) = 2d6+4. You end with 2d6 (big weapon) + 5 (strength) + 4 (rage boost to strength) = 2d6+9. Assuming strength starts at 16 and the ability boosts all go to strength, except one because strength...
  10. T

    Mearls: Armour is not DR in 4th.

    You haven't answered the question. How? The thing about buffs is that you really should be able to cancel them out with other buffs. That fact that we can't cancel damage-increasing magic (spells or items) with damage-decreasing magic (spells or items) is itself an artefact of hit points - it's...
  11. T

    Mearls: Armour is not DR in 4th.

    Okay, tell me how - without Power Attack, and preferably without magic either. (Remember, the Christmas Tree Effect is going away, and many D&D players are breathing sighs of relief.) And you're still short of scaling with hit points if you're talking about 20th level characters. You'd need to...
  12. T

    Mearls: Armour is not DR in 4th.

    No, I said damage per hit remains relatively constant, barring Power Attack. That's different from damage per attack. And I stand by that. There are some boosts to damage, but nothing that really matches the scale of hit point increase. Oh, come on. You were so close to actually expressing...
  13. T

    Mearls: Armour is not DR in 4th.

    Did you take the time to read my comment concerning damage over time? Ah, so your problem is that you don't like the possibility of a one-hit take-down? Well, nobody suggested porting M&M's damage system directly to D&D. If you want a version that requires two hits to take someone down, you...
  14. T

    Mearls: Armour is not DR in 4th.

    If I might be granted a second response to this post, I just thought of something else. This does bring up a good point. For many years (basically ever since players started getting more complex with their tactics than "I hit the monster") D&D's damage system has, by necessity, been placed...
  15. T

    Mearls: Armour is not DR in 4th.

    Relative to hit points, it's not too far off it, barring Power Attack. I didn't say that high-level characters' damage output wasn't greater over time. Yep. That game says, "Let's take all the factors that produce a single result (in this case negating the force of the blow with no or reduced...
  16. T

    Mearls: Armour is not DR in 4th.

    Well, yeah. The reason so many alternatives to hit points come out looking so different, I believe, is because to get them to work, you often have to put something in place to counteract the scaling of hit points. Once you've done that, you wind up looking at the resulting system, and realising...
  17. T

    Mearls: Armour is not DR in 4th.

    Yep, you're quite right. As I said earlier, what I'm really hoping for out of 4e is that it provides a similar scaling of power. It's scaling problems that give us the noted issues with high and low level play (issues the design team have said they are working to fix). If those are fixed, I...
  18. T

    Mearls: Armour is not DR in 4th.

    Dealbreaker or not, if you can't tell me what benefit it brings to the table, it doesn't go on any requirements list I'll deal with. Fine. You want to play a semantic game, you've just defined yourself a victory. There's no "damage reduction" mechanic that works by your definition. Now run...
  19. T

    Mearls: Armour is not DR in 4th.

    No. The tests are to define the play experience you want. Unless you tell us why these specific mechanics add value to your play experience, I won't accept them as part of the requirements. (And no, it's not a given that hit points are a basic mechanic of the game. I already said that.) And...
  20. T

    Mearls: Armour is not DR in 4th.

    I don't know what discussion you are talking about, because I've worked with the maths fairly extensively. I'm wondering whether you've got me confused with somebody else, because I believe I've actually never raised this issue in a D&D design discussion online. I've responded when others have...
Top Bottom