Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Convincing 4th Edition players to consider 5th Edition
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5960540" data-attributes="member: 54877"><p>That's a simulation rule which is orthogonal to the question of illusionism and immersion. It happens to be one of the places where 4E is slightly more like Basic than 3E is (though it gets muddy with 1E and 2E), and certainly 4E DMs can take advantage of that characteristic to good effect, if so inclined and their players are interested. Simulation can be pursued with immersion or without. It's true that people who really get into illusionism often also tend to appreciate simulation, but the opposite is not necessarily true.</p><p> </p><p>Of course, then you'll get people that complain about such illusionism of different monster basis not working in 4E because the numbers are all built off of a clear formula, and other people complaining that it doesn't work in 3E because of templates. In both cases, one answer was the same as it was when the early D&D DM had players spending too much time flipping through monster listings instead of playing--change it up, using the math you have as a baseline. </p><p> </p><p>OTOH, one of 4E's answers to this question was that if the mechanics reflect the flavor of the creature, it won't matter if you as a player know how it works or not. That is, if kobolds are shifty, and this works, it doesn't matter if you know that or not. They'll still be hard to pin down. Contrast that to something like 2E, where kobolds are not, in fact, all that capable, Tucker's Kobolds notwithstanding. It's all an illusion, but using sufficient numbers and environment for the DM to extrapolate from some fluff abilities that are nowhere specified mechanically in the creature. That's why they are "Tucker's Kobolds" and not "Tucker's usage of Kobolds exactly like they are spelled out to work." <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite8" alt=":D" title="Big grin :D" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":D" /></p><p> </p><p>Note also that it would theoretically be possible to combine the 3E and 4E approach here, as far as the simulation is concerned. (I'm less sanguine about how well it would handle.) That is, imagine if you will a big, organized list of 4E-type powers like "shifty", that any creature can theoretically have. And then you have a rather simple monster manual as the base, but with the injunction that you pick abilities that either match the flavor text--or the flavor as you've envisioned it. So mechanically working a lot like 4E, but organized and applied more in the 3E manner, on top of creatures that are more Basic/AD&D in presentation. That is, the orc listing has a base stat, ecology, motivations, etc. Then you can read into that whatever you want, and go pick out some abilities that fit it--or you can wing it off of the ability scores and description, ala Tucker's Kobolds. </p><p> </p><p>This would tie back into my comments on illusionism because when as a player reacting to the monsters the DM plops down on the table, you don't really know if its all illusionism or mechanically backed or some mixture, other than knowing how the DM usually runs things.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5960540, member: 54877"] That's a simulation rule which is orthogonal to the question of illusionism and immersion. It happens to be one of the places where 4E is slightly more like Basic than 3E is (though it gets muddy with 1E and 2E), and certainly 4E DMs can take advantage of that characteristic to good effect, if so inclined and their players are interested. Simulation can be pursued with immersion or without. It's true that people who really get into illusionism often also tend to appreciate simulation, but the opposite is not necessarily true. Of course, then you'll get people that complain about such illusionism of different monster basis not working in 4E because the numbers are all built off of a clear formula, and other people complaining that it doesn't work in 3E because of templates. In both cases, one answer was the same as it was when the early D&D DM had players spending too much time flipping through monster listings instead of playing--change it up, using the math you have as a baseline. OTOH, one of 4E's answers to this question was that if the mechanics reflect the flavor of the creature, it won't matter if you as a player know how it works or not. That is, if kobolds are shifty, and this works, it doesn't matter if you know that or not. They'll still be hard to pin down. Contrast that to something like 2E, where kobolds are not, in fact, all that capable, Tucker's Kobolds notwithstanding. It's all an illusion, but using sufficient numbers and environment for the DM to extrapolate from some fluff abilities that are nowhere specified mechanically in the creature. That's why they are "Tucker's Kobolds" and not "Tucker's usage of Kobolds exactly like they are spelled out to work." :D Note also that it would theoretically be possible to combine the 3E and 4E approach here, as far as the simulation is concerned. (I'm less sanguine about how well it would handle.) That is, imagine if you will a big, organized list of 4E-type powers like "shifty", that any creature can theoretically have. And then you have a rather simple monster manual as the base, but with the injunction that you pick abilities that either match the flavor text--or the flavor as you've envisioned it. So mechanically working a lot like 4E, but organized and applied more in the 3E manner, on top of creatures that are more Basic/AD&D in presentation. That is, the orc listing has a base stat, ecology, motivations, etc. Then you can read into that whatever you want, and go pick out some abilities that fit it--or you can wing it off of the ability scores and description, ala Tucker's Kobolds. This would tie back into my comments on illusionism because when as a player reacting to the monsters the DM plops down on the table, you don't really know if its all illusionism or mechanically backed or some mixture, other than knowing how the DM usually runs things. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Convincing 4th Edition players to consider 5th Edition
Top