The Next haters over on RPGNet are now complaining that the game is broken because a hundred normal villagers with bows could take down a dragon. Setting aside the matter of zero-to-hero vs superheroic-all-the-time playstyles, it's baffling to me that the simplest solution - if you find dragons too easy to hit then add 2 to their AC - is met with such outrage and scorn.

I don't really have anything against 4E, besides the fact that it has to be played on a tactical grid. It has some pretty cool ideas, especially around monster stat-blocks and design. But if it really is the edition for system-wanks who think any scope for improvisation is the sign of a broken design, then that alone is enough to deter me from playing it. When so many people with game preferences and outlooks diametrically opposed to mine love something, I have to give that a lot of weight.

Quote from: Sommerjon;665554No you ban people who might question your authority, the sheep you call players learned never. to. question. your. authority.

Show us on the doll where the bad DM touched you.

QuoteAh yes the glorious this game sucks so I will play it to prove to myself how it sucks routine.

I don't know about Randal but I was fucking pumped for 4e. I bought the Preview books, argued with idiots on RPGnet about how awesome 4e was going to be, etc...

And when it came out I went to a midnight release at my FLGS and sat all night reading the books.

And then I played it.

And it sucked. Really, really sucked.

So I more than gave 4e a fair shake. I wanted to like it as much if not more than anyone else I knew.

Quote from: Sommerjon;665554Ah yes the glorious this game sucks so I will play it to prove to myself how it sucks routine.

 Giving a game several plays before declaring that it sucks is more than fair.

Quote from: Haffrung;665557The Next haters over on RPGNet are now complaining that the game is broken because a hundred normal villagers with bows could take down a dragon.

My favorite was some asshole going on about how players and monsters should NEVER be threatened by a pitchfork wielding mob because that's not "heroic".

As for the whole "100 villagers could kill the dragon!", it's a great example of a spherical cow.

Quote from: Sommerjon;665547Who said anything about better?  What's so wrong with it just being different?

What I meant was that some people will prefer the older style rpgs.

Sorry if I misinterpreted your statement. I thought you were suggesting the newer games were better.

I thought when you said "Why would someone go back to an older game" you meant newer games were better.

Quote from: Haffrung;665557The Next haters over on RPGNet are now complaining that the game is broken because a hundred normal villagers with bows could take down a dragon. Setting aside the matter of zero-to-hero vs superheroic-all-the-time playstyles, it's baffling to me that the simplest solution - if you find dragons too easy to hit then add 2 to their AC - is met with such outrage and scorn.

[Grabs cane] Back in my day, a few guys with some attitude doing what normally requires over a hundred people to do is pretty damn heroic.

Quote from: Haffrung;665557The Next haters over on RPGNet are now complaining that the game is broken because a hundred normal villagers with bows could take down a dragon. Setting aside the matter of zero-to-hero vs superheroic-all-the-time playstyles, it's baffling to me that the simplest solution - if you find dragons too easy to hit then add 2 to their AC - is met with such outrage and scorn.

I don't really have anything against 4E, besides the fact that it has to be played on a tactical grid. It has some pretty cool ideas, especially around monster stat-blocks and design. But if it really is the edition for system-wanks who think any scope for improvisation is the sign of a broken design, then that alone is enough to deter me from playing it. When so many people with game preferences and outlooks diametrically opposed to mine love something, I have to give that a lot of weight.

Nobody tell them this Polish legend of a shoemaker who killed a dragon by baiting it with a sheep stuffed with sulphur, so the dragon exploded from all the water it drank to try and sate his thirst after eating said sheep.

Besides I don't know what's worse, a hundred guys killing a dragon with bows or one guy killing a dragon with a lucky shot (hello Bard)?

Also links please, I want a good laugh and I don't want to wad to see what you meant .

edit: nvm think I've found it.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;665562[Grabs cane] Back in my day, a few guys with some attitude doing what normally requires over a hundred people to do is pretty damn heroic.

Back in my day, a dragon ate 99 villagers until that last one hit ten 6s on a d6 in a row, killing it.

Of course we were playing Warhammer 1e, and houseruled that 6s explode with ranged weapons too.

Still surprises me that people think you have to use a grid and minis with 4e.

I have gmed it extensively without a grid.

Quote from: Piestrio;665560My favorite was some asshole going on about how players and monsters should NEVER be threatened by a pitchfork wielding mob because that's not "heroic".

As for the whole "100 villagers could kill the dragon!", it's a great example of a spherical cow.

One guy was bemoaning his character not being able to outgrow kobolds or something equally stupid.

I very nearly recommended od&d/ad&d, but i don't think that's really what he meant...

Quote from: One Horse Town;665566One guy was bemoaning his character not being able to outgrow kobolds or something equally stupid.

I very nearly recommended od&d/ad&d, but i don't think that's really what he meant...

My absolute favorite is the "If I have 12 holy symbols..." guy.

What a clown.

Quote from: Piestrio;665567My absolute favorite is the "If I have 12 holy symbols..." guy.

What a clown.

Sounds like the opening line of one of the dancing routines from "Fighter on the Roof".

Quote from: One Horse Town;665566One guy was bemoaning his character not being able to outgrow kobolds or something equally stupid.

I very nearly recommended od&d/ad&d, but i don't think that's really what he meant...

I'd proscribe a hefty dose of waaaaambulence or hardening the hell up.

Quote from: Rincewind1;665569Sounds like the opening line of one of the dancing routines from "Fighter on the Roof".
QUOTE]

"Cleric on the Roof" is more appropriate.

Also fighters and Barbarians will use STR as a dump stat because they can just get a magic item.

God the stupidity burns.

I wouldn't have put up with players that shitty when I was 12 and dumb.

It all goes to confim my suspicions that WOTC D&D is aimed primarily at the same shitty players the books used to warn against.

Quote from: Piestrio;665574Also fighters and Barbarians will use STR as a dump stat because they can just get a magic item.

.

You must be talking about 3e and the magic item store hardcoded into the game.  Well, I suppose you could be talking about 4e too, but I wouldn't know if 4e has the same magic store approach that 3e does because I don't play 4e.

But in the world of random magic items, using STR as a dump stat is pretty foolish.  Especially in 5e where every single modifier to hit is more important than ever because the scale is shrunk down.

I've played three characters in various campaigns in Next all the way up to 4th-5th level.  In each group, only one or two magic items have been found so far.  For the entire group, not per person.  And those were pretty minor.  Finding a magic item to give you a 18 STR probably wouldn't happen until near the double digit levels.  And what fighter is going to use STR as a dump stat hoping that he'll be alive in 7-9 more levels?  He'd probably be dead by then.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;665576You must be talking about 3e and the magic item store hardcoded into the game.  Well, I suppose you could be talking about 4e too, but I wouldn't know if 4e has the same magic store approach that 3e does because I don't play 4e.

But in the world of random magic items, using STR as a dump stat is pretty foolish.  Especially in 5e where every single modifier to hit is more important than ever because the scale is shrunk down.

I've played three characters in various campaigns in Next all the way up to 4th-5th level.  In each group, only one or two magic items have been found so far.  For the entire group, not per person.  And those were pretty minor.  Finding a magic item to give you a 18 STR probably wouldn't happen until near the double digit levels.  And what fighter is going to use STR as a dump stat hoping that he'll be alive in 7-9 more levels?  He'd probably be dead by then.

 IF SUCH ITEMS ACTUALLY EXIST and they HAVE A GOLD PIECE VALUE players WILL GET AHOLD OF THEM ONE WAY OR ANOTHER!!!!

So yeah, how can you argue with that logic. :rolleyes: