Elephant in the room: rogue and fighter dailies.

Hussar · May 27, 2012

nnms said:
This actually illustrates both sides of the issue rather well.

One side: The touchdowns emerged out of the positioning of the players, and the incremental actions that cause the event to be described as such a great touch down after the fact. The touchdowns emerge from the choices, skill and relative positions of the athletes involved. They don't do this every game because they can only do it when the situation allows for it and it is very rare.

Other side: The touchdowns occured because they were dramatically and competitively appropriate. The quarterback used his "once a career" ability which caused everything to come together in perfect alignment to make them happen. They don't do this every game because they expended their "once a career" ability and thus everything will not come together to allow it to happen again because that would be hogging the spotlight, repetitive, and not fair.

When playing D&D I used to prefer justifying things for dramatic and game purposes, now I like emergent play. Now I get my drama focused fun from games like In A Wicked Age or Strands of Fate and want a traditional emergent exploration-description experience from my D&D (or whatever fills the space D&D used to occupy).

Yeah, I can buy that arguement. Nothing wrong with emergent play. The only issue I might have is fiddling with the odds so that something emerges fairly often (and that fairly will vary from table to table). That "Really Great Thing" that only happens once in a campaign and never again, is bloody fantastic when it happens, but, how much time do we spend doing "Moderately Fun Things" waiting for it to line up and happen?

I never, ever want to go back to the whole 40 minutes of fun packed into 4 hours thing.

nnms · May 27, 2012

Hussar said:
Yeah, I can buy that arguement. Nothing wrong with emergent play. The only issue I might have is fiddling with the odds so that something emerges fairly often (and that fairly will vary from table to table). That "Really Great Thing" that only happens once in a campaign and never again, is bloody fantastic when it happens, but, how much time do we spend doing "Moderately Fun Things" waiting for it to line up and happen?

I never, ever want to go back to the whole 40 minutes of fun packed into 4 hours thing.

Similarly, I wouldn't want to go to a football game where every play was a bombastic super play. I want the tempo.

I'm playing Basic D&D right now and am enjoying the whole session, every session. We never use a battle map and never leave the "describe what the character does" mode of play.

The times in the past when I've experienced the 40 minutes of fun over 4 hours thing, it was when I wanted a different type of game and only a fraction of the session was that type of play.

I don't think a traditional system has to produce fractional fun. I think it's a result of lack of buy-in or a desire for a different approach.

Hussar · May 27, 2012

nnms said:
Similarly, I wouldn't want to go to a football game where every play was a bombastic super play. I want the tempo.

I'm playing Basic D&D right now and am enjoying the whole session, every session. We never use a battle map and never leave the "describe what the character does" mode of play.

The times in the past when I've experienced the 40 minutes of fun over 4 hours thing, it was when I wanted a different type of game and only a fraction of the session was that type of play.

I don't think a traditional system has to produce fractional fun. I think it's a result of lack of buy-in or a desire for a different approach.

Yeah, I can totally buy that. I'm about to play a Weird West RPG with some of my students and I'm really looking forward to it. You can't get much more pared down than an entire RPG that fits on an A4 sheet of paper.

pemerton · May 28, 2012

Kamikaze Midget said:
Does 5e's looser stunt structure help you feel unencumbered, or do you feel like you can't do anything because there's not big colorful boxes telling you specifically that you can?

Is this a hypothetical looser stunt structure, or are you referring to the playtest rules?

In the How to Play document and DM's Guidelines I didn't see a whole lot. There's the "improvisation" action, that tells players that the GM will adjudicate. And then there is advice to GM's to not grant advantage to attacks based on colourful description - which seems opposite to what you're saying.

Janaxstrus · May 28, 2012

Dr. Confoundo said:
I love 4e's AEDU setup so much that I want to take it behind the middle school and get it pregnant. I'll be very disappointed if it gets shown the door during this edition change, and will not be buying 5e.

Sadly for you, I think you might not be a 5e purchaser then. I would wager dollars to donuts that AEDU is gone.

Hussar · May 28, 2012

Janaxstrus said:
Sadly for you, I think you might not be a 5e purchaser then. I would wager dollars to donuts that AEDU is gone.

I'd take that bet. They might be trimmed down, they might be somewhat different and less in the front in 5e, but, if you think that AEDU is completely gone, I think you're mistaken. Heck, even this early playtest has elements of AEDU in it.

jadrax · May 28, 2012

Hussar said:
Heck, even this early playtest has elements of AEDU in it.

An interesting comment, could you expand upon it?

Rogue Agent · May 28, 2012

Bobbum Man said:
Now...somebody tell me why the athletes involved didn't do this EVERY game.

It boils down to dissociated mechanics.

If you're interested in playing a roleplaying game, then you want the mechanical decisions you're making as a player to be associated with the decisions your character is making.

When you use dissociated mechanics, on the other hand, you aren't roleplaying. You're making decisions which are dissociated from your character's decisions. Which is fine. They can satisfy other creative desires or gamist preferences.

So when you see an amazing football, the player isn't thinking, "Well, time to use my 'once per game' catch." Nor do they think, "Well, I'd better skip making this catch because I might need that 'once per game' ability later on." But that is what you, as a player, are thinking when you use these dissociated mechanics.

That's the difference.

OmegaMan950 · May 28, 2012

So when you see an amazing encounter, the player isn't thinking, "Well, time to use my 'once per day' fireball." Nor do they think, "Well, I'd better skip casting this fireball because I might need that 'once per day' ability later on." But that is what you, as a player, are thinking when you use these dissociated mechanics.

Why do people keep saying these things when caster dailies are just as dissociated as fighter dailies? The only answers that have been given are "It's magic" or "It's how it has always been"

Edit: I've never been convinced by the essays on dissociated mechanics at the Alexandrian, especially when spells max out at certain caster levels, the vancian memorization spell system is not completely true to Vance's novels, and that martial dailies can be explained through feats of endurance, training, and strength. The whole marking section in the essay is dishonest at best.

Kinak · May 28, 2012

OmegaMan950 said:
Why do people keep saying these things when caster dailies are just as dissociated as fighter dailies? The only answers that have been given are "It's magic" or "It's how it has always been"

Dissociated from what?

If you have an assumed baseline for magic, the D&D system probably deviates from it significantly. D&D wizards don't work like Aes Sedai or Dying Earth wizards or the Maia of Middle Earth or... well, any system of magic from any fantasy setting you can name. Most people with exposure to fantasy literature are used to that changing with each world and just roll with it.

But, like it or not, we do have assumed baselines for feats of physical prowess and how human (and humanoid) bodies work. Designers have to take those baselines into account somehow or it leaves a hanging narrative question of how human bodies work in their system.

If you say, "yeah, our fighters use magic powers to boost their prowess" not everyone will like that, but mechanics you associate with it wouldn't cause this problem. Otherwise, you need to find a power system that's a good fit with the narrative you're creating about the class.

Cheers!
Kinak

Elephant in the room: rogue and fighter dailies.

Hussar

Legend

nnms

First Post

Hussar

Legend

pemerton

Legend

Janaxstrus

First Post

Hussar

Legend

jadrax

Adventurer

Rogue Agent

First Post

OmegaMan950

First Post

Kinak

First Post

Similar Threads