D&D 4E The "We Can't Roleplay" in 4E Argument

[Dannyalcatraz]

4e does this purposefully in almost every case. We are given the tools to craft the story, but those tools are made flexible enough that players have the freedom to adjust them to fit the circumstances of the narrative.

I really don't see 4Ed that way, sorry.

(Then again, I play games like HERO...)

 

[Dannager]

I really don't see 4Ed that way, sorry.

No need to apologize. 4e doesn't think of you that way, either.

 

[666Sinner666]

RP in 4e is far more open and easier than it was in previous editions because the skills now are so broad and your either trained or not trained. Where one of the problem lies is that the 4e system is heavily tipped to balanced and tactical fighting for both the players and the GM that they forget that an RPG should have RP in it.

One of the other problems with 4e is also its broad skills. Since you no longer have things like perform or profession people forget to root themselves in the game world. Players have to make it a point to do so and GM's need to encourage it. Otherwise, the game really will degrade into endless combats and the PC's will essentially be marauding looters.

What I see as one of the last and biggest problems is the sheer number of classes and options for each class and they ALL can do some really interesting stuff. So many players want to jump around from one character to the next so they can taste all the proverbial buffet has to offer. This makes it very hard for the player and the GM to root a character into the game world but also makes finding a class that suites the player, in some cases, easier.

If no one ever tries nothing will ever happen.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

RP in 4e is far more open and easier than it was in previous editions because the skills now are so broad and your either trained or not trained.

I really can't agree with this. I don't think that there is necessarily a linkage between the skill system and RP at all. Personally, I found the RP in 1Ed- with a rudimentary, binary good/bad skill system- and the RP in 3.X- which had a broad and expandable skill system that let you improve over time- to be far easier.

Since you no longer have things like perform or profession people forget to root themselves in the game world.

Just out of curiosity, how DOES one handle things like artistic performances, craftsmanship and the like in 4Ed? Most of my PCs had some kind of non-combat aspect to them, usually something artistic like playing an instrument (and in systems other than D&D, as well).

The absence of codification of such things- IME, present in most RPG systems- presented me with a quandary: how do I know how good a musician (or woodcarver or cook, etc.) my PC is?

With 1Ed and similar systems, it was binary: if you chose to be a musician, you were skilled enough to be notable. Everyone else was essentially a scrub or newb.

Other systems, like 3.X gave you a skill ranking, which let you compare raw numbers. You would know whether you were a rank amateur, a veteran performer, or among the best in the world by looking at your ranks & modifiers. Heck, you'd even know how much your abilities owed to just raw natural talent.

But there is no such skill at all in 4Ed...

And before you ask- no, I don't need such skills to root my PC in a game world. My Dwarven Starlock/Psion is quite well rooted indeed- that PC's background & development has actually altered the campaign- but 4Ed's systemic de-emphasis of non-combat skills, etc. has created gaps in what I'd like him to be in terms of rounding out.

What I see as one of the last and biggest problems is the sheer number of classes and options for each class and they ALL can do some really interesting stuff. So many players want to jump around from one character to the next so they can taste all the proverbial buffet has to offer. This makes it very hard for the player and the GM to root a character into the game world but also makes finding a class that suites the player, in some cases, easier.

For some people (as the Devo song goes), freedom from choice is what they need. The options presented are numerous enough that they cannot decide what to do. For others, the options, while numerous, may not be sufficient in number for them to realize the concepts in their heads, and may jump from PC to PC in an effort to find the combination of elements that most closely mirrors what they envision. Despite the large & growing number, none is quite what they're looking for.

In both cases, the players go through characters like an elephant goes through peanuts, but there is no one solution that will satisfy both.

(Personally, I'm more like the latter than the former.)

 

[Dannager]

The absence of codification of such things- IME, present in most RPG systems- presented me with a quandary: how do I know how good a musician (or woodcarver or cook, etc.) my PC is?

You tell me. It's your PC.

The 4e system makes no prescriptions for such things as are unrelated to adventuring. If you want to be exceptional at the sort of thing a regular (read: non-adventurer) guy might be exceptional at, that's totally up to you. If your character was a sartorial genius who clothed princesses before he turned to adventuring, that's cool.

What 4e says is this: there's really no point to covering this stuff mechanically - the range of possible things a PC might want to have as background skills is so broad, and will come up so comparatively rarely, that forcing a PC to invest character resources in it just to have a supported, fleshed-out backstory is silly. You don't have to make the choice between being good at adventuring and being good at other stuff. You can have as developed, thorough, and wide-ranging backstory as you care to, and you won't be punished for those choices and that effort whilst fending off a dragon.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Which, IMHO, sucks. Royally.

Just to give one example, without mechanical support, there is no way within the system to resolve a classic "crossroads" scenario where the hero challenges the Devil or his agent to a contest of artistic skill- typically playing a guitar, fiddle or some instrument- for some great prize: his soul, greater skill, the life of another...

By excising such skills from the system, the only way to resolve the above is to go outside the game's system (it's not a skill challenge without a referent skill). That is bad design.

It is especially bad because it assumes that there is no way such skills can be related to adventuring...and that is simply not true.

 

[wedgeski]

Just to give one example, without mechanical support, there is no way within the system to resolve a classic "crossroads" scenario where the hero challenges the Devil or his agent to a contest of artistic skill- typically playing a guitar, fiddle or some instrument- for some great prize: his soul, greater skill, the life of another...

Well to be honest I wouldn't want such a grand prize to be contingent on a string of "Perform" rolls either. It's fertile ground for the Skill Challenge framework but you'd have to work at getting Charisma and Dex-based checks in there with appropriately adjusted DC's, and I'm sure the Bard in the party would want to have a word with you about which powers he could bring to bear as well.

In some ways though I do miss the various Knowledge sub-skills that proved so very useful to me in giving PC's flavourful mechanical bonuses as they adventured.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Well to be honest I wouldn't want such a grand prize to be contingent on a string of "Perform" rolls either.

Why not? It is precisely the skill that is in question: can you out-fiddle the Devil in Georgia? Can you outplay Satan's chosen guitarist? Or from other mythologies, can you sing a song or recite a poem so sad that your beloved is returned to the living? Can you tell a story entertaining enough or a joke funny enough to save your life?

That IS performance.

It's fertile ground for the Skill Challenge framework but you'd have to work at getting Charisma and Dex-based checks in there with appropriately adjusted DC's, and I'm sure the Bard in the party would want to have a word with you about which powers he could bring to bear as well.

No it's not: there is no referent SKILL upon which to base a challenge. And the Bard is no more proficient than anyone else with similar stats: Vicious Mockery does not make you an insult comic, it's a spell, not a skill. Often, such contests have rules about that kind of thing...and cheating=forfeit and thus, loss.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Why not? It is precisely the skill that is in question: can you out-fiddle the Devil in Georgia? Can you outplay Satan's chosen guitarist? Or from other mythologies, can you sing a song or recite a poem so sad that your beloved is returned to the living? Can you tell a story entertaining enough or a joke funny enough to save your life?

That IS performance.

Oh, it is performance. But I'd really rather not have the most important part of it be how high the player rolls on a d20 always using the same base number. I'd far rather a skill challenge using:

• Diplomacy - pick a performance tailored to the target audience
• Bluff - how believable can you make your story
• Intimidate - make them laugh, make them cry, make them scared
• Insight - notice when to change the pace or when they are getting bored
• Endurance - whatever the performance is, it is epic. And physically demanding.
• Secondary: History/Streetwise/Arcana/Religion/Nature/Dungeoneering - fill in details to draw people in

Skills like that allow you to actively craft the performance and reflect what you are doing. Much more evocative than perform/perform/perform/perform. Especially if it comes down to a single die roll.

 

[pemerton]

On the Perform and "Devil Came Down to Georgia" issue:

I think that a possible answer here - and perhaps one that might satisfy at least some of the "fiction first-ers" - is that the PC should be using a skill like Diplomacy or Bluff that is applied in a way consistent with the prior depiction of the PC by that player in the game.

For example, I have a player who has made it clear from the get-go that his PC was formerly a very good baker and pastry chef. Should a baking contest ever come up, I would let that PC use his Nature and/or History skills in the bake-off to greater effect than the other PCs, who have no similar bacstory.

Another, different but related, example - I have a player who, from the get-go, has explained that his PC practices sleeping standing up. The few times it comes into play, he gets the benefit of that practice (in that he doesn't start night-time combats prone). Again, this could also make a difference to the sorts of things that player's PC can do with Endurance in a skill challenge.

Yet another example would be the difference it would make to a Diplomacy check, involving the mayor of a town, whether the PC in question was a foreigner or a member of the local nobility.

These are all cases where the pre-established fiction can be incorporated into the set-up and resolution of a skill challenge.