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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Game Fundamentals - The Illusion of Accomplishment
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="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5171030" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>I don't see alot to be gained by even trying to answer such a loaded question. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I could say the same about any prior edition of D&D, and in particular, 1e does a far better job I think than any edition of delivering the game experience described by the rule books if only because it gives some of the most direct and also evocative descriptions of how the game is to be played. Gygaxian prose has something going for it.</p><p></p><p>I also note you directly undermine this claim later in your post by talking about 4e's incoherence and 'tricky relationships'.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm not sure where you are going there, but FitM (at least without teeth) is in my opinion old school and uber-traditional. Virtually all classic mainstream RPGs use FitM in a loose form. Things like hit points, attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks have always been FitM and are typical features of older games. I consider it a much more typical mark of indie games that they feature more FatE or more FatB than traditional games. With AD&D since 1e, you generally get proposition ('I attack') -> Fortune -> Narrative resolution describing that attack in a way suitable to the fortune. For example, what in any edition does an attack roll or an attack doing 4 hit points of damage mean? The answer is obviously, you can't know outside of the circumstance. In 1e, 4 hit points of damage might be an attack that misses ('The giant hornet bashes you with its abdomen, but fortunately was unable to connect with its stinger' (saving throw vs. poison was made)), or one that leaves a scratch, or one that disembowels the target. This level of abstraction has always irritated simulationists (like my younger self) who want a more 'realistic' game (moving fortune nearer to the end) with more concrete relationships between propostion/stakes and ultimate result.</p><p></p><p>An example of a mechanic that might give FitM more teeth would be rerolls, but we had that in D20 modern. The 4e action point system actually moves the game further from FitM than some 3e variants (Modern, M&M, Unearthed Arcana (IIRC) etc.) because RAW you can't use them to modify fortune (in the middle), only to buy more actions (IIRC).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>If you are talking about what I think you are talking about, mechanics just working regardless of situation (requiring the ad hoc invention of narration), then these differ from traditional D&D by being more gamist, not by being more 'Indie'. I don't see the relationship between TDE rules and 4e you keep asserting. I'm not familiar enough with HeroQuest to judge, but from what I understand of it, HeroQuest is a nar game using flexible prose/keyword character creation, contested rolls and with fortune practically at the beginning - which doesn't at all remind me of 4e.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The published skill challenge system is not non-traditional. It's merely formalized. As a the most simple example, there is nothing non-traditional about 'You can get 3 success in theivery to disarm the trap, or you can evade it, or you can bash it into rubble." Some of the homebrew versions of skill challenges I've seen (especially those that came out before the rules were released) are abit or alot more Forge-like in their mechanics, but the published version is just the extended version of a skill check.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>See the Immortals ruleset, for example. I don't see how this relates to Indie games as I understand the term. </p><p></p><p>I can't help but feel that when you say 4e has a relationship to Indie games, you mean, "4e the way I play it at my table has a relationship to Indie games".</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 5171030, member: 4937"] I don't see alot to be gained by even trying to answer such a loaded question. I could say the same about any prior edition of D&D, and in particular, 1e does a far better job I think than any edition of delivering the game experience described by the rule books if only because it gives some of the most direct and also evocative descriptions of how the game is to be played. Gygaxian prose has something going for it. I also note you directly undermine this claim later in your post by talking about 4e's incoherence and 'tricky relationships'. I'm not sure where you are going there, but FitM (at least without teeth) is in my opinion old school and uber-traditional. Virtually all classic mainstream RPGs use FitM in a loose form. Things like hit points, attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks have always been FitM and are typical features of older games. I consider it a much more typical mark of indie games that they feature more FatE or more FatB than traditional games. With AD&D since 1e, you generally get proposition ('I attack') -> Fortune -> Narrative resolution describing that attack in a way suitable to the fortune. For example, what in any edition does an attack roll or an attack doing 4 hit points of damage mean? The answer is obviously, you can't know outside of the circumstance. In 1e, 4 hit points of damage might be an attack that misses ('The giant hornet bashes you with its abdomen, but fortunately was unable to connect with its stinger' (saving throw vs. poison was made)), or one that leaves a scratch, or one that disembowels the target. This level of abstraction has always irritated simulationists (like my younger self) who want a more 'realistic' game (moving fortune nearer to the end) with more concrete relationships between propostion/stakes and ultimate result. An example of a mechanic that might give FitM more teeth would be rerolls, but we had that in D20 modern. The 4e action point system actually moves the game further from FitM than some 3e variants (Modern, M&M, Unearthed Arcana (IIRC) etc.) because RAW you can't use them to modify fortune (in the middle), only to buy more actions (IIRC). If you are talking about what I think you are talking about, mechanics just working regardless of situation (requiring the ad hoc invention of narration), then these differ from traditional D&D by being more gamist, not by being more 'Indie'. I don't see the relationship between TDE rules and 4e you keep asserting. I'm not familiar enough with HeroQuest to judge, but from what I understand of it, HeroQuest is a nar game using flexible prose/keyword character creation, contested rolls and with fortune practically at the beginning - which doesn't at all remind me of 4e. The published skill challenge system is not non-traditional. It's merely formalized. As a the most simple example, there is nothing non-traditional about 'You can get 3 success in theivery to disarm the trap, or you can evade it, or you can bash it into rubble." Some of the homebrew versions of skill challenges I've seen (especially those that came out before the rules were released) are abit or alot more Forge-like in their mechanics, but the published version is just the extended version of a skill check. See the Immortals ruleset, for example. I don't see how this relates to Indie games as I understand the term. I can't help but feel that when you say 4e has a relationship to Indie games, you mean, "4e the way I play it at my table has a relationship to Indie games". [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Game Fundamentals - The Illusion of Accomplishment
Top