I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
So, Fortune In The Middle is the unnecessarily obfuscating Forge jargon that may be usefully illustrated as follows:
Often, in D&D, you'll describe your actions like this:
A: I attack! *roll dice* I hit! *roll dice* I do X damage!
Fortune-In-The-Middle (as far as I can decipher) means you instead describe your actions like this:
B: *roll dice* I attacked, hit, and did X damage.
The first situation is cause-and-effect: your character does something, you roll dice to determine what happens as an effect of that action. In the first example, each event happens and has an effect.
The second situation is effect-then-figure-out-the-cause. You roll dice to see what happens, then you figure out how you want to describe it. In the second example, you figure out the effects that happen, and then work backwards to explain why those effects happened.
You'd think this wouldn't matter too much, but I think a lot of 4e's most controversial decisions are controversial because of the use of Fortune-In-The-Middle.
Like, knocking an ooze prone. Cause-and-effect it wouldn't happen: you can't cause that effect. Oozes can't be knocked over.
Reverse the chronology, and it's not a problem: the ooze has the mechanical effect of not being able to move until it spends a move action. Maybe it is squished under your boot? Maybe it is pinned by your sword? Maybe it is scared? Whatever.
Or, like inspirational healing from a Warlord. Cause-and-effect it wouldn't really happen that way: If you're hurt from a sword wound, someone shouting at you doesn't make the wound go away.
Reverse the chronology, and it's not a problem: You have the mechanical effect of healing HP from being shouted at. Looks like you didn't have a sword wound, you just had a bit of a scrape and were being a drama queen about it. NBD.
I submit that Fortune In The Middle, by its very nature is a problem. Not for everyone. Not always. But absolutely for some. And certainly for me.
Why?
I'm glad I assumed you asked.
1: I Am Not A Quantum Mathematician
[sblock]
I, like most folks in the West, think of time as a linear series of events that cause and precipitate each other. Because of X, Y happens. Because I put my hand on that burner, I got burned. If I did not do that, I would not have the burn.
When I sit down to play a bit of heroic fantasy, I still think of time as linear, and I want to play the game that way, as a series of causes and effects. Because my character swung a sword at that goblin, that goblin might get hit by my character's sword. If my character did not do that, the goblin wouldn't have that risk.
FitM makes me do that backwards, and I hate it. FitM tells me the goblin got hit for X damage, and leaves it up to me to figure out how or why. FitM tells me I have this burn on my hand, but doesn't tell me how it got there. It says "The ooze is prone!" without telling me how or why my "Leg Sweep" ability did that to it. DMs can always justify it, but it always feels like a hollow justification. During the combat, the goblin is both alive and dead and only when we open the box and see the result do we know what happened to it.
[/sblock]
2: I Am Not Credulous
[sblock]
Anyone who has DM'd can tell you one simple truth: No plan ever stands up to player interference. You will always throw away things you've worked hard to prepare. You WILL be made to go off-script, and when you do, you BETTER have some ability to roll with that stuff.
This means that the game is always at least a little bit improvisational. Even the most prepared DM probably does his NPC dialogue off-the-cuff. No one knows how the dice are going to roll. "Guaranteed success" in D&D usually isn't, because the d20 can always come up a 1.
FitM obliterates this assertion. You can't successfully apply the rules of improv to FitM.
The rules of improv are all about establishing a spontaneous believable imaginary world together. As such, they do things like advise you to "Go Line For Line," which means to listen to what the other person is saying, then give a response. This is the core behavior of improv: you listen, then respond. Your response has many more guidelines (like Say Yes, Say Yes And, Don't Ask Questions, Be Specific, etc.) that improve the believability of the imaginary world and help your allies to reinforce it by acting as if it is real.
That's verisimilitude for you.
You can't do that well in FitM, because each "line" isn't established. Instead, FitM tells you how you end the scene, and that it doesn't matter how you get there, as long as you get to that end. You don't gradually establish your imaginary world, you dictate the result and then blatantly manipulate the artificial context to make it conform to your result.
This shatters my verisimilitude. Brutally.
You see, I'm not inclined to believe that a world of elves and dragons is real. I'm not equipped to take your word for that. I need it reinforced, in mechanics, in consequences, in cause-and-effect results, in being able to interact with the thing. FitM dismisses my interaction by dictating the result. Sure, I may be able to affect the result in some way blatantly, but I can't let my actions lead where they will, I can't accept input and build on invention, I can't let myself be surprised by what happens. I know the outcome. I just need to explain it somehow. If I can't take this in a new direction with my actions, I feel like my actions are meaningless. The constant refrain of "It's all just in your head!" is too strong.
[/sblock]
3: I Appreciate the Unknown
[sblock]
In the moment, in a game that moves cause-to-effect, you create a future-focused psychology. You anticipate. You imagine. You dread. You wonder what the consequences of your actions could be, you know the only limits are the DM's imagination, and you are frequently surprised by the effect. You don't know what might spiral out of your individual choice.
When using FitM, you know what the consequences of your actions are...you know this before you even know what your actions are. Your only option for exploring the unknown is in exploring whatever you did to cause those results. Ultimately, it is the same result, so this exploration seems like an exercise in pointless naval-gazing: it doesn't AFFECT anything.
This disempowers my action. It means that whatever I did to trigger the die roll isn't nearly as important as the EFFECT of the die roll. I feel like a slave to the dice rather than in control of my own character. I can only cause things that will have the dictated effect.
[/sblock]
Two things before you post your counter-rant:
1: If you like FitM and want to have its babies, that's cool. I'm posting about my current opinion. If you'd like to post yours, I think you should absolutely tell me why, and maybe even make your own thread about how awesome you think it is. I also think you should absolutely keep playing your awesome game in which you have crazy fun. It's cool. We all gots Opinions, and this is a forum for discussing them.
I'm not trying to knock how you have fun, I'm just trying to express why I (and perhaps others) don't have fun with this mode.
2: Feel free to post in this thread agreements, disagreements, personal anecdotes, general questions, observations, etc. Don't feel free to post about how other people or other editions are bad bad naughty evil wrong stupid poopie-heads with deep psychological problems and clear hygiene issues. Try to keep your posts about YOU and how you feel, and not about what other people should or need to do.
So: How do YOU feel about this thing?
Often, in D&D, you'll describe your actions like this:
A: I attack! *roll dice* I hit! *roll dice* I do X damage!
Fortune-In-The-Middle (as far as I can decipher) means you instead describe your actions like this:
B: *roll dice* I attacked, hit, and did X damage.
The first situation is cause-and-effect: your character does something, you roll dice to determine what happens as an effect of that action. In the first example, each event happens and has an effect.
The second situation is effect-then-figure-out-the-cause. You roll dice to see what happens, then you figure out how you want to describe it. In the second example, you figure out the effects that happen, and then work backwards to explain why those effects happened.
You'd think this wouldn't matter too much, but I think a lot of 4e's most controversial decisions are controversial because of the use of Fortune-In-The-Middle.
Like, knocking an ooze prone. Cause-and-effect it wouldn't happen: you can't cause that effect. Oozes can't be knocked over.
Reverse the chronology, and it's not a problem: the ooze has the mechanical effect of not being able to move until it spends a move action. Maybe it is squished under your boot? Maybe it is pinned by your sword? Maybe it is scared? Whatever.
Or, like inspirational healing from a Warlord. Cause-and-effect it wouldn't really happen that way: If you're hurt from a sword wound, someone shouting at you doesn't make the wound go away.
Reverse the chronology, and it's not a problem: You have the mechanical effect of healing HP from being shouted at. Looks like you didn't have a sword wound, you just had a bit of a scrape and were being a drama queen about it. NBD.
I submit that Fortune In The Middle, by its very nature is a problem. Not for everyone. Not always. But absolutely for some. And certainly for me.
Why?
I'm glad I assumed you asked.
1: I Am Not A Quantum Mathematician
[sblock]
I, like most folks in the West, think of time as a linear series of events that cause and precipitate each other. Because of X, Y happens. Because I put my hand on that burner, I got burned. If I did not do that, I would not have the burn.
When I sit down to play a bit of heroic fantasy, I still think of time as linear, and I want to play the game that way, as a series of causes and effects. Because my character swung a sword at that goblin, that goblin might get hit by my character's sword. If my character did not do that, the goblin wouldn't have that risk.
FitM makes me do that backwards, and I hate it. FitM tells me the goblin got hit for X damage, and leaves it up to me to figure out how or why. FitM tells me I have this burn on my hand, but doesn't tell me how it got there. It says "The ooze is prone!" without telling me how or why my "Leg Sweep" ability did that to it. DMs can always justify it, but it always feels like a hollow justification. During the combat, the goblin is both alive and dead and only when we open the box and see the result do we know what happened to it.
[/sblock]
2: I Am Not Credulous
[sblock]
Anyone who has DM'd can tell you one simple truth: No plan ever stands up to player interference. You will always throw away things you've worked hard to prepare. You WILL be made to go off-script, and when you do, you BETTER have some ability to roll with that stuff.
This means that the game is always at least a little bit improvisational. Even the most prepared DM probably does his NPC dialogue off-the-cuff. No one knows how the dice are going to roll. "Guaranteed success" in D&D usually isn't, because the d20 can always come up a 1.
FitM obliterates this assertion. You can't successfully apply the rules of improv to FitM.
The rules of improv are all about establishing a spontaneous believable imaginary world together. As such, they do things like advise you to "Go Line For Line," which means to listen to what the other person is saying, then give a response. This is the core behavior of improv: you listen, then respond. Your response has many more guidelines (like Say Yes, Say Yes And, Don't Ask Questions, Be Specific, etc.) that improve the believability of the imaginary world and help your allies to reinforce it by acting as if it is real.
That's verisimilitude for you.
You can't do that well in FitM, because each "line" isn't established. Instead, FitM tells you how you end the scene, and that it doesn't matter how you get there, as long as you get to that end. You don't gradually establish your imaginary world, you dictate the result and then blatantly manipulate the artificial context to make it conform to your result.
This shatters my verisimilitude. Brutally.
You see, I'm not inclined to believe that a world of elves and dragons is real. I'm not equipped to take your word for that. I need it reinforced, in mechanics, in consequences, in cause-and-effect results, in being able to interact with the thing. FitM dismisses my interaction by dictating the result. Sure, I may be able to affect the result in some way blatantly, but I can't let my actions lead where they will, I can't accept input and build on invention, I can't let myself be surprised by what happens. I know the outcome. I just need to explain it somehow. If I can't take this in a new direction with my actions, I feel like my actions are meaningless. The constant refrain of "It's all just in your head!" is too strong.
[/sblock]
3: I Appreciate the Unknown
[sblock]
In the moment, in a game that moves cause-to-effect, you create a future-focused psychology. You anticipate. You imagine. You dread. You wonder what the consequences of your actions could be, you know the only limits are the DM's imagination, and you are frequently surprised by the effect. You don't know what might spiral out of your individual choice.
When using FitM, you know what the consequences of your actions are...you know this before you even know what your actions are. Your only option for exploring the unknown is in exploring whatever you did to cause those results. Ultimately, it is the same result, so this exploration seems like an exercise in pointless naval-gazing: it doesn't AFFECT anything.
This disempowers my action. It means that whatever I did to trigger the die roll isn't nearly as important as the EFFECT of the die roll. I feel like a slave to the dice rather than in control of my own character. I can only cause things that will have the dictated effect.
[/sblock]
Two things before you post your counter-rant:
1: If you like FitM and want to have its babies, that's cool. I'm posting about my current opinion. If you'd like to post yours, I think you should absolutely tell me why, and maybe even make your own thread about how awesome you think it is. I also think you should absolutely keep playing your awesome game in which you have crazy fun. It's cool. We all gots Opinions, and this is a forum for discussing them.
I'm not trying to knock how you have fun, I'm just trying to express why I (and perhaps others) don't have fun with this mode. 2: Feel free to post in this thread agreements, disagreements, personal anecdotes, general questions, observations, etc. Don't feel free to post about how other people or other editions are bad bad naughty evil wrong stupid poopie-heads with deep psychological problems and clear hygiene issues. Try to keep your posts about YOU and how you feel, and not about what other people should or need to do.
So: How do YOU feel about this thing?
