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 coming! 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="pemerton" data-source="post: 5171100" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>Fair enough. But if you're not prepared to consider why some players find some aspects of traditional AD&D play tedious, then I don't think you're going to find it easy to understand the appeal of 4e to some of those same gamers.</p><p></p><p>It's hard to compare across games where I'm also comparing across so many years, but I don't agree with this. One example which comes up from time to time (I've seen both MerricB and Doug McCrae talk about it): the DMG time rules assume you're playing nearly every day, but no where is this spelled out.</p><p></p><p>Well, that's the meaning of "more-or-less" - you have to take the less with the more! But the real contrast isn't with 1st ed, it's with 2nd ed AD&D which provides (more-or-less) the 1e mechanics but promises a game more like Pendragon or Ars Magica. Or (more controversially, but in my opinion) '3E, which in its mechanics has trouble deciding whether its AD&D or Rolemaster.</p><p></p><p>D&D and T&T, yes. Traveller, RQ and RM, no - they're basically fortune at the end. Simulationism kills FitM.</p><p></p><p>The character creation of HQ is different from 4e. 4e has a sourcebook sales approach to flexibility! But HQ is not fortune at the beginning - it is FitM, in some ways resembling 4e skill challenges (with the direction of influence being from HQ to 4e). As described in the rulebook, the player states intention, the dice are rolled and then the GM narrates outcome.</p><p></p><p>FitM is one resemblance. The use of fixed lists of character abilities to nevertheless be rather expressive of the PC's role and personality is another. Ablative resources is another (healing surges in 4e), with a high degree of narrative flexibility as to how the ablation manifets itself in the gameworld. The existence of fairly robust and level-sensitive encounter building guidelines is another. The use of gameworld history and points of light is another.</p><p></p><p>I'm not claiming identity. Nothing in 4e realy resembles The Dying Earth's advancement mechanic, for example.</p><p></p><p>I don't agree with this. For example, the notion that 3 successful checks - whatever the skill in question - transitions the encounter to a new stage, is not a traditional notion.</p><p></p><p>This is true, but that is also the least interesting implementation of the skill challenge system that the game offers.</p><p></p><p>I explained in my thread why 4e is different from this. The main difference, but not the only one, is player entitlement and narrative authority.</p><p></p><p>The notion of the game having a defined "endgame" is something I associate with games like Nicotine Girls or My Life With Master. I don't of traditional games that have the same thing (ie a thematic resolution built into the game, as opposed to simply a mechanical limit beyond which the rules don't keep going).</p><p></p><p>Well, that may be true - ultimately, I can only speak for my own play experiences. But I still believe that I have the designers on my side on this one.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5171100, member: 42582"] Fair enough. But if you're not prepared to consider why some players find some aspects of traditional AD&D play tedious, then I don't think you're going to find it easy to understand the appeal of 4e to some of those same gamers. It's hard to compare across games where I'm also comparing across so many years, but I don't agree with this. One example which comes up from time to time (I've seen both MerricB and Doug McCrae talk about it): the DMG time rules assume you're playing nearly every day, but no where is this spelled out. Well, that's the meaning of "more-or-less" - you have to take the less with the more! But the real contrast isn't with 1st ed, it's with 2nd ed AD&D which provides (more-or-less) the 1e mechanics but promises a game more like Pendragon or Ars Magica. Or (more controversially, but in my opinion) '3E, which in its mechanics has trouble deciding whether its AD&D or Rolemaster. D&D and T&T, yes. Traveller, RQ and RM, no - they're basically fortune at the end. Simulationism kills FitM. The character creation of HQ is different from 4e. 4e has a sourcebook sales approach to flexibility! But HQ is not fortune at the beginning - it is FitM, in some ways resembling 4e skill challenges (with the direction of influence being from HQ to 4e). As described in the rulebook, the player states intention, the dice are rolled and then the GM narrates outcome. FitM is one resemblance. The use of fixed lists of character abilities to nevertheless be rather expressive of the PC's role and personality is another. Ablative resources is another (healing surges in 4e), with a high degree of narrative flexibility as to how the ablation manifets itself in the gameworld. The existence of fairly robust and level-sensitive encounter building guidelines is another. The use of gameworld history and points of light is another. I'm not claiming identity. Nothing in 4e realy resembles The Dying Earth's advancement mechanic, for example. I don't agree with this. For example, the notion that 3 successful checks - whatever the skill in question - transitions the encounter to a new stage, is not a traditional notion. This is true, but that is also the least interesting implementation of the skill challenge system that the game offers. I explained in my thread why 4e is different from this. The main difference, but not the only one, is player entitlement and narrative authority. The notion of the game having a defined "endgame" is something I associate with games like Nicotine Girls or My Life With Master. I don't of traditional games that have the same thing (ie a thematic resolution built into the game, as opposed to simply a mechanical limit beyond which the rules don't keep going). Well, that may be true - ultimately, I can only speak for my own play experiences. But I still believe that I have the designers on my side on this one. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Game Fundamentals - The Illusion of Accomplishment
Top