gimme back my narration

[Hypersmurf]

As you know, I don't play 20 questions with you anymore.

That's only one question!

Though if it's such a big deal to clarify a gaming philosophy you brought up in the first place, do feel free not to bother.

-Hyp.

 

[Choranzanus]

And on the subject of glowing runes and godlasers... it seems to me that even these egregious examples -- in some folks eyes -- of bad, imagination-contaminating 4e flavor can be fixed without much fuss.

If the glowing rune in the Righteous Brand description bothers you, dim the lights. Describe it as the Mark-of-Cain-in-reverse that appears on the target's forehead, an invitation from God to do harm to them.

If the godlaser is a bit too... laser Floyd, describe it as spiritual warfare; an invisible angel that only the priest can see whose merest touch weakens the target's resolve.

It's not hard to make 4e rock things old-school and OT (that's Original Testament!).

Well, even if we accepted that it is easy to change, I feel compelled to say that glowing runes and godlasers are still just examples of bad, imagination-contaminating 4e flavor.

But the thing is I do not subscribe to 4e philosophy of "fit flavor to mechanics". To me the mechanics without flavor is balderdash, and it is easier to just start from scratch. That is why 4e monster manual is completely useless to me, while 2e materials are "bad, but fixable".

To use your example of spiritual warfare instead of godlaser: you limit yourself to inventing flavor that fits the mechanics, but in the end it is still mechanics for godlaser, so it doesn't exactly fit. It is easier to start from scratch; you have flavor you want and mechanics that supports it.

 

[Mallus]

Well, even if we accepted that it is easy to change...

It was for me.

I feel compelled to say that glowing runes and godlasers are still just examples of bad, imagination-contaminating 4e flavor.

So change them.

To me the mechanics without flavor is balderdash, and it is easier to just start from scratch.

You don't play effects-based games like HERO/Champions or Mutants and Masterminds, do you? My experience with systems like those inform my opinion of 4e (in those games character powers are described in terms of their mechanical effects only; it's up to the player to further characterize them. A power called "Energy Blast" might represent a laser gun, a magician's ray of fire, a mutant's plasma-bolt, or even an arrow from a super-talented archer). And for the record, I think you'd have a tough time proving that it's easier to design an entire game system from scratch than it is to come with some new flavor text.

To use your example of spiritual warfare instead of godlaser: you limit yourself to inventing flavor that fits the mechanics, but in the end it is still mechanics for godlaser, so it doesn't exactly fit.

I have no problem with more explicitly Christian replacement flavor I provided for the godlaser. I think it's a perfect match. What specific objection do you have w/it?

It is easier to start from scratch; you have flavor you want and mechanics that supports it.

I re-wrote the godlaser description in my head while walking to lunch. Re-writing 4e would have taken me... slightly longer.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I re-wrote the godlaser description in my head while walking to lunch. Re-writing 4e would have taken me... slightly longer.

That doesn't show much - we don't know how long your walk to lunch is!

 

[Mallus]

That doesn't show much - we don't know how long your walk to lunch is!

I'm lazy, it's a short walk...

 

[Raven Crowking]

I'm lazy, it's a short walk...

Can't fool me....I read your sig!

 

[Switchblade]

I'm lazy, it's a short walk...

So much for your sig


Drat, ninja'd

 

[Arnwyn]

Without sarcasm, I ask: how's that working out for you? Personally, I've never encountered a D&D world that held up to much scrutiny. I've never seen a game that honestly deserved to be called a 'simulation' of anything... except, perhaps, a simulation of a crappy fantasy novel

I have a hard time believing that you can't figure out that everyone draws their personal line in the sand at a different place.

So, my personal answer to the above is, of course, "it's 'working out' perfectly in the editions/systems I choose to play, thanks".

 

[Mallus]

No, those aren't alike. There's a big difference between:

(A) There is a rule that has implications I don't want, and
(B) There is no rule that has implications that I do want.

Logically, !W(R) != W(!R).

I think my intertia-less horse could be seen as both cases. The 3.x rule set both implies a lack of momentum (A) and fails to offer explicit rules governing the momentum of objects (B).

In either case, the point is that the rules describe an in-game world that's problematic for a given player when read a certain way. Since both unwanted implications and rules paucity are unavoidable in an abstract system designed with speed and ease-of-play in mind, it seems to me you either have to change your reading of the rules, modify them, or pick a new game.

Using Righteous Brand (again) as an example, you can 'fix' the problem by simply using a literal reading. Darkness has no effect on the Brand, neither does it confer any additional bonuses when used in darkness, it does only what the rules say it does. If that's not satisfactory, you can leave the mechanics the same and add further descriptive text (the Brand only appears in the beneficiaries mind, it appears to everyone, but as a quick flash that only aids a singles target, etc.) Or you can extrapolate further conditional benefits and restrictions (it doesn't work in magical darkness, in normal darkness it removes the low-light penalty for a radius of 5 squares).

I'm not trying to argue anyone into liking 4e (I'm not that dumb), but I am trying to understand why some people are claiming that 4e presents significant difficulties when it comes to modifying/customizing/reskinning the RAW.

 

[billd91]

I'm not trying to argue anyone into liking 4e (I'm not that dumb), but I am trying to understand why some people are claiming that 4e presents significant difficulties when it comes to modifying/customizing/reskinning the RAW.

As far as I'm concerned, it presents an annoying preconception that may not work for the game I'm running. It means that any change has to run against a current already there, as opposed to set a current.

It's not insurmountable to me. It's just really annoying.