What's on your mind?
+ Log in or register to post
Results 531 to 540 of 929
Sunday, 8th July, 2012, 02:10 AM #531
Grandfather of Assassins (Lvl 19)
There are a lot of people out there who will talk in impressions without easily elaborating on what they mean. They ought not to be summarily dismissed. They probably outnumber those of us participating on these message boards.Bill D
"There's a fine line between a superpower and a chronic medical condition."
- Doctor Impossible
- EN World
- has no influence
- on advertisings
- that are displayed by
- Google Adsense
Sunday, 8th July, 2012, 02:14 AM #532
The Grand Druid (Lvl 20)
Crazy Jerome's comments about illusionism upthread.
It seems to me that some people think that there is more "depth" or "weightiness" in a game which has intricate build rules that very highly regulate whether a PC has a +6 or a+8 bonus next to their intricately distinguished skill descriptors, even though the gamet has no action resolution mechanics for those skills, other than "achieve a certain number of successes as specified by the GM, against a range of DCs specified by the GM."
I appreciate the importance of colour in PC build - that is a big part of the attraction of the PC build rules in a game like Rolemaster. But I think action resolution rules are pretty important as well - otherwise that colour is just rough-and-ready guidelines for GM-arbitrated free-forming.
When it comes to social interaction, 4e relies more heavily on the GM and players, rather than the build mechanics, to provide the colour (although a lot of colour options are spelled out in race and class descriptions, sidebars in the "power" books, etc), but provides much more robust action resolution techniques, than 3E does.
In that respect it is more like a "modern" RPG such as HeroWars/Quest than a "traditional" RPG like RQ or RM or HERO.
My own impression is that many of those who say that 4e is not an RPG are not familiar with the games that are obvious influences upon its design.
In 4e combat victory conditions are described in abstract mechanical terms - reduce the enemy from N to 0 hp. (There are other alternatives, like surrender, but 0 hp is the default.)
What 0 hp means in the game - dead, or disabled in some other fashion - is left a bit more flexible.
In 4e social victory conditions are also described in abstract mechanical terms - achieve N successes before 3 failures. What N successes means in the game is left flexible - the players and GM are expected to outline the stakes of the conflict at the start of the interaction (as per the skill challenge rules in the DMG) but these stakes can evolve over the course of resolution (and are likely too, in a high-complexity skill challenge).
This sort of resolution no more takes control away from the player than does the combat rules that says "If you're at 0 hp you can't narrate your guy as running around all over the place smiting his enemies." That is, it establishes parameters within the fiction, within the scope of which the players is free to narrate what his/her PC is doing.
Sunday, 8th July, 2012, 02:54 AM #533
Magsman (Lvl 14)
As always, play what you like
Sunday, 8th July, 2012, 04:14 AM #534
Magsman (Lvl 14)
Sunday, 8th July, 2012, 04:27 AM #535
The Great Druid (Lvl 17)
Bottom line is this.
The 3.0 books were literally pulled from the shelves in 2003, 3 years after launch.
3.5 stopped getting new 3.5 specific sourcebooks in 2007 - 4 years after launch. And was pulled from the shelves in 2008. Playtesting of 4e started in IIRC 2006.
4e is possibly stopping getting new 4e specific sourcebooks in 2012 - 4 years after launch. It might continue into 2013. Either way it significantly outlasted 3.0 and has lasted as long as 3.5 has. Therefore if you don't consider 4e a succes because we are playtesting 5e, you must count 3.0 as a miserable failure and 3.5 as a failure on exactly the same metric.
Sunday, 8th July, 2012, 04:32 AM #536
Cutpurse (Lvl 5)
Sunday, 8th July, 2012, 05:13 AM #537
Magsman (Lvl 14)
As exciting as the "was 4e a failure" topic is, i think we all know it has been driven into the ground multiple time and again on Enworld (largely by those of us posting on this thread). In the interest of keeping the discussion on subject maybe opening up the 4e failure discussion elsewhere would be a good idea.
Sunday, 8th July, 2012, 05:26 AM #538
Lama (Lvl 13)
Why buy into this designer-fed need for reunification at all? What's the point of this great reconciliation beyond selling books? I mean do any of us still reading this thread even want to come together? Do the camps actually want to belong to the same community again? I don't...
And what does a new edition really get any of us that we don't already have? I really can't grasp the appeal of modularity to imitate what we've already purchased, at additional costs to the 5e core. I might be able to understand if there was actual new approaches to the game, something beyond our editions' capabilities, but that's not what we're getting, is it?
Can they really distill D&D into a pure form all of us can embrace- or is it the added flavors and complexities, save vs. death, Vancian magic, powers, imbalance, balance, chain mail bikinis, succubus as a demon, succubus as a devil- that create the D&D experience. I think I'm posing its our preferences, our vehement differences, our details, that make the game, not any sort of pure D&D truth. D&D is lightning in a bottle, and it doesn't strike twice for any of us, and frankly why should it?
I say love, hate, and rage. It's your game. You're always right. They're always wrong. Scavenge what you like from the edition carcases and build your walls higher with the bones. It's always been a game for cannibals.
Sunday, 8th July, 2012, 05:29 AM #539
Magsman (Lvl 14)
Back on topic...
I like 4E because it is very DM Neutral
I like the fact that I can make the character I want (outside of straight bans) without hoping the DM breaks rules in my favor.
Dwarf Wizard? Fine no problem.
Halfling Paladin and not suck? Fine.
Human fighter and not beg for better items than the wizard and cleric? Cool.
Sure the DM can have the villager hate me and chase me as they hate both goblins and sorcerers. I can accept that. It's his world to control.
But I don't have to beg him for help and house rules (or make him feel like he has to make them) because goblins have a -2 Cha penalty and all around stick as a race.
My beard is hairy.
Sunday, 8th July, 2012, 05:45 AM #540
Orcus on an Off-Day (Lvl 22)
Bottom line is actually this: I told folks to stop with the edition warring upthread. Some of you didn't listen, and will be booted from this thread.
Anyone else? We can step up to vacations from the site, if need be.