Recent content by Philip

That is your main problem right there. Suppose you were asking the question differently: I want to get my players to haggle over mundane items in ther markets, but they don't/won't. If your players don't like some mechanic or other aspect of play, attempting to coerce them to use it anyway is...

The RAW is fairly clear. Your problem doesn't seem to be a rules problem but rather a trust problem. Insisting on using the RAW doesn't insulate you from trust issues, better to fix those than argue back and forth about the RAW and their application.

I don't think I misunderstand. I agree, Narrativists do need rules, they just don't care overmuch if it is 3.0, 3.5e, 4e or some WoD ruleset, as long it meets some minimum standards. I think 4e will meet enough of those standards to be fun for the strictly narrativist gamer.

Three groups are recreating the adventure in the Hobbit with the 4e rules. Thhe first a group consists of strict simulationists, the second of strict gamists and the third of stric narrativists. At some juncture the person playing Bilbo's character stumbles across the ring and puts it on. What...

While you are at it, you might even try to ask yourself how you determine the length of a day in the City of Brass. Or on any world that doesn't shared the assumed Earth default.

And I suppose Duellist bugs you because he doesn't really fight any duels. A class name is supposed to evoke some sense of images that you want your PC to aspire too, and is not supposed to be an accurate description of the character at first level. "Warlord" inspires people to play the class a...

Precisely the problem with the multiple encounters per day (or better, before recovering resources) paradigma. I think it a strange conceit that PCs are treating a fight with NPCs as if their lives aren't at stake, because 'it is the first encounter of the day'.

True, but in practice it meant that intelligent players would attempt to rest and recover their limited resources whenever some of it was spent. Consequently, in nearly all encounters the PCs have 100% of their resources unless you forced some time-constriction upon them. I got a bit tired of...

I usually just houserule: no special attacks or moves when gaining an AoO. Certainly no attacks that cause an AoO in itself. That will simplify it a lot already.

It does, but you just have to hold a dagger in your other hand to generate the AoO.

Just think about this, but replace fireball with arrow or sword at a static level. With the same attack is parried/avoided by the minions, but hits the BBEG. How were the minions able to parry an attack that the BBEG couldn't? It is true that one of the options not longer exists, but is it...

My players (and myself) have never had that problem with others attacking them in melee versus their static AC. There is still the dread of an enemy rolling a 20 or the exultation of them rolling a 1. Why would this suddenly become a problem with spells? I don't understand what you are trying...

Actually, they don't. Point of the new way to build monsters is not to let them follow the same building rules as PCs. If you have a monster good at climbing, just give it +15 to its Climb skill, regardless of Hit Dice, Levels or whatever. Much easier, and much more elegant than giving low HD...

Certainly not, classes and roles are whole other kind of things. Classes are the trappings, the appearance of the characters. Appearance is what draws people to play something. Roles are the way the classes function in an adventure/party, and those are wholly separate from a the trappings...

The Ogre hefts his club and swings at your head (DM rolls dice) and misses you. The wizard mumbles some arcane words and a sphere of fire appears coming towards you at lightning speed (DM rolls dice) and misses you. Being attacked is still exciting right? So will being the subject to spells...