D&D 4E Is 4E doing it for you?

[LostSoul]

Wow, you've suddenly convinced me with this compelling presentation.

sigh

Le sigh.

The only thing I'm trying to convince you of is that I, personally, can get more "roleplay" out of 4e based on my own definition of roleplay.

The blanket statment

But if you want to roleplay, there are a range of better options available.​

only applies if the "you" referred to has a similar view of "roleplay" as ByronD.

 

[IanArgent]

I don't understand how you come up with story on your own when you are running a module. Like I said, the great majority of the time I run my own stuff. But the whole point of running a module is the story is provided.

I gave up running my own material because of the difficulty of the mechanics; and fell back to running modules, usually with the serial numbers filed off and changes made to fit my campaign.

But for me the mechanical side is a non-issue. It does not present a problem.

For me running on the fly is no problem. Running prepped is no problem.
The only problem with running a module is making certain I have someone else's story backwards and forwards before I start.

I found it much easier to let someone else deal with the mechanics and change the story if necessary.

You are not going to get an argument out of me here.
I agree 100% that 4E is easier to run.

For me that is a non-issue and the price of that simplification is a total deal breaker. I'm not asking you to have the same point of view.

Got it. Whereas the mechanical complexity of D&D 3e ended up being a deal breaker for me. I didn't want the heavy mechanics of D&D3, the complex interactions of primary and derived stats, the laundry list of spell-like abilities, etc. At first I thought I did. But as time went on, it just got to be a chore. There's some issues with ensuring that the "rules are followed" on the DM side of the screen here - I could have made up stats as I went along. But then where do I peg the XP values? Unless I wanted to go entirely to session- and goal-based XP rather than XP for encounters I felt as though I needed to ensure that the rules for opponents were followed, since the XP values were tied pretty closely to opponent abilities. Otherwise, what's the point of the ECL system, anyway?

 

[BryonD]

Le sigh.

The only thing I'm trying to convince you of is that I, personally, can get more "roleplay" out of 4e based on my own definition of roleplay.

The blanket statment

But if you want to roleplay, there are a range of better options available.​

only applies if the "you" referred to has a similar view of "roleplay" as ByronD.

You are 100% correct. I never claimed you needed to agree with my preference. As a matter of fact, I specifically said you did not.

But kids with towels on their shoulders are roleplaying as well and I don't find their standard to be simply a different way of looking at it. They don't have a similar view of "roleplay" as I do. I can agree that different people have different preferences and fully accept that. But I'm not going to pretend it is six of one and half a dozen of another.

 

[BryonD]

I gave up running my own material because of the difficulty of the mechanics

Ok, there is the night and day between you and me.
Is there any point of further discussion?

 

[Logos7]

Its doing it for me,

more importantly its doing it for my wife, who having run a single game of 3.5 said never again.

She's willing to run a 4th edition game.

Freshblood > Old Asshats, Tradition, the DnD Feel , and all that jazz

Logos

 

[Raven Crowking]

And laying a PC in that system wasn't much more fun.

Did you try the Book of Erotic Fantasy?

 

[LostSoul]

But kids with towels on their shoulders are roleplaying as well and I don't find their standard to be simply a different way of looking at it. They don't have a similar view of "roleplay" as I do. I can agree that different people have different preferences and fully accept that. But I'm not going to pretend it is six of one and half a dozen of another.

I'm not sure what you're saying here. Can you explain it a different way? I'm not getting it.

 

[Obryn]

I'm not sure what you're saying here. Can you explain it a different way? I'm not getting it.

As I read it - like I read it before - he's saying that there's some objective measure by which one way of playing an elf is better than another way of playing an elf, and that you are blind to these obvious, objective differences. And you're playing an objectively worse game because of it. Only he's not really saying it in those words, because analogies are less likely to invoke mod action, and he can always claim he was misinterpreted.

Ask him about the tee-ball analogy.

-O

 

[ExploderWizard]

Did you try the Book of Erotic Fantasy?

Best post of the thread so far

 

[Raven Crowking]

As I read it - like I read it before - he's saying that there's some objective measure by which one way of playing an elf is better than another way of playing an elf, and that you are blind to these obvious, objective differences. And you're playing an objectively worse game because of it. Only he's not really saying it in those words, because analogies are less likely to invoke mod action, and he can always claim he was misinterpreted.

Ask him about the tee-ball analogy.

-O

This interpretation might hold true if you believe there is some obvious, objective measure by which kids playing with towels on their shoulders is objectively worse -- or less role-playing -- than, say, playing Mutants & Masterminds.

But, of course, it would be disingenious (at best) for you to claim that there is an obvious objective difference between some kinds of role-playing, but not between others when it doesn't suit your position.

Either the "rules of the game" create an objective difference in the role-playing experience or they do not. If they do, then it is fair to say that the rules of one edition create an objective difference in role-playing experience. If they do not, then Monopoly is as much of an rpg as D&D.

Of course, ByronD didn't say that "kids with towels on their shoulders" were oobjectively worse, he said they were objectively different and didn't have "a similar view" of roleplaying compared to him.


RC