Discussing 4e Subsystems: POWERS!

[Fifth Element]

OK, that works for you, but um...what about me? To me it feels magic. That will not be changed by anything anyone says.

That's fair. But correct me if I'm wrong, but words to the effect of "the only way you can imagine this..." have been written in your posts in the past, regarding martial exploits and hit points/healing.

 

[justanobody]

That's fair. But correct me if I'm wrong, but words to the effect of "the only way you can imagine this..." have been written in your posts in the past, regarding martial exploits and hit points/healing.

Did I say that anywhere?

You're assuming the fighter is the cause of the discrepancy. Why not assume that the decision the fighter makes is whether or not to hit someone on the head, and the decision the player makes is whether or not the target might be stunned? That way, we can narrate anything as the cause of the discrepancy. The hammer glanced, or the hammer hit square. The target had his teeth clenched and wasn't disoriented, or the target's jaw snapped shut and he's rattled. The blow was caught short, or the blow struck at optimum distance.

The fighter isn't saying "I'll use my Stunning Hammer Blow", the fighter is saying "I'll hit him on the head". The player is saying "I'll spend my daily use of Stunning Hammer Blow to mean that this hit will stun the target".

All the fighter knows is that sometimes, if you're lucky, smacking someone on the head with a hammer will stun them.

From his point of view, it's no different to a feat that says "On a successful hit, roll 1d6; on a 6, the target is stunned". Sometimes, if the player rolls a 6, the target is stunned; sometimes, if the player doesn't roll a 6, the target isn't stunned. The fighter doesn't get to decide whether or not the target is stunned; sometimes it happens, sometimes it doesn't.

In 4E, sometimes the player decides to use a power that stuns - like rolling a 6. Sometimes, the player doesn't decide to use a power that stuns - like not rolling a 6. From the fighter's perspective, it's exactly the same - sometimes, people get stunned, and sometimes, they don't.

-Hyp.

The fighter is a fictional entity and persona created by the player. Therefore if the player [me for for the sake of 5th Element] doesn't see it that way, then the veil is shattered.

Its just the way the powers system works. I either see X-men or everyone is a spellcaster.

X-men don't belong in my D&D games. We should break out the old Marvel RPG for that.

 

[Fifth Element]

Did I say that anywhere?

That's why I asked you to correct me if wrong. I seem to recall you saying it, though I may be wrong. Not sure if I have the energy to go looking.

 

[justanobody]

That's why I asked you to correct me if wrong. I seem to recall you saying it, though I may be wrong. Not sure if I have the energy to go looking.

I am not able to use the search function and don't know if I could find all of my own posts. It would take a few days for google to sync up before I could search my posts here.

I guess it is a race to check my posts then over this week.

 

[Hypersmurf]

The fighter is a fictional entity and persona created by the player. Therefore if the player [me for for the sake of 5th Element] doesn't see it that way, then the veil is shattered.

Do your characters never have an opinion on anything that differs from yours?

-Hyp.

 

[justanobody]

Do your characters never have an opinion on anything that differs from yours?

-Hyp.

If my characters have any opinion ever, I am leaving the planet, just as I would if my toaster started talking to me!

Red Dwarf - talking Toaster Scene

 

[Fifth Element]

If my characters have any opinion ever, I am leaving the planet, just as I would if my toaster started talking to me!

Are you saying that none of your characters have a personality of their own? They're all the same and they're just like you?

I think most D&D characters have a different opinion on murder & robbery than you do. At least I hope they do.

 

[Hussar]

Now to be fair, JustaNobody's playstyle isn't invalid. I believe the term that gets tossed about is "Avatar" play where your character is an extention of yourself into the game world. There's nothing wrong with this.

However, the realization has to be made that this is hardly the ONLY playstyle out there as well.

 

[pemerton]

Now to be fair, JustaNobody's playstyle isn't invalid. I believe the term that gets tossed about is "Avatar" play where your character is an extention of yourself into the game world. There's nothing wrong with this.

To add to this: it is obvious - and has been since before the books were released - that 4e is not a game that is designed for players who want to maximise the transparency of game and metagame.

Now I personally find it hard to imagine that those players were really satisfied with 3E either, but maybe it was just close enough to the line that they could tolerate it.

 

[firesnakearies]

4e is not a game that is designed for players who want to maximise the transparency of game and metagame

Could you explain what this means, please?


I'm seriously asking, not being smarmy.