Why I think you should try 4e (renamed)

[EroGaki]

See now something like this doesn't bother me in slightest. I feel like a lot of people get hung up on the idea that the rules must somehow be the physics of the game world, rather than just a means to facilitate play. Why does the pirate lord have a high AC? Because it's more interesting than being able to smear him in one shot because he's not wearing plate. The rules were meant to service the story, not the other way around. If anything it would have been nice if that had extended to the PC's more (i.e. things like their AC were more tied to their concept and dramatic convention than their equipment).

Agreed, for the most part. I notice that when the rules tend to be disregarded for the sake of facilitating play, it happens from behind the screen. Players rarely get to play bare-chested pirates with high AC's by virtue of interesting concept. If a PC runs around with no armor on in D&D, he gets pasted. Why should DM's be the only ones who get license to disregard the rules?

 

[Fifth Element]

They worked according their own rule books, not according to the 4E one.

Give me a break, you know what I meant.

I don't really understand what you intend with this question as I was replying to Jacks "4E works however the DM wants it to".

My point is that many complaints about 4E also work as complaints about all editions of D&D. However, these days they tend to be framed as things that are wrong with 4E, and only 4E.

 

[Ariosto]

Decades ago, ignorant of any previous such attempts, I cooked up a combination of traditional RPG mechanisms with dramatic rules -- a basis of description and resolution in the demands of narrative structure. At first, I thought that "my innovation" was very promising. My friends, although they thoroughly enjoyed the new approach (as a change of pace, not as "better than" an RPG), averred that hardly anyone was likely to "get" it.

Nowadays, it's clear that a great many people grasp the essential idea. However, the lessons I learned (the hard way) about needing to design rules to the point rather than trying to do a new kind of job with ill-fitted, hand-me-down tools seem not to have attained such wide currency.

 

[Fifth Element]

Correct. All monsters/NPCs of level X have an AC of Y+(12-16).

That's the guideline. And that's a range, not a number.

 

[EroGaki]

So give him a reason. A ridiculous Dex score. A special dodge bonus. An environmental bonus. If you want to have a reason, you devise a reason. (As you yourself suggest in the bit below


I think you're arguing semantics. If you have to make up something new to get the AC desired, that's the very same thing as just deciding what the AC is.

Actually, I'm not. Making up something new (prestige class, template) is working within the bounds of the rules. It also provides possible plot hooks/ideas/etc.

Handwaving something because you want it to be that way despite the rules not supporting it is a whole new animal, and one I personally don't support.

Granted, this is just my opinion; my DMing style might be significantly different from yours.

 

[AllisterH]

There's a critical difference. The amount of "stage management" and "cast management" a Game Operations Director is apparently expected to do in 4E is not everyone's cup of tea.

This particular stew of "story telling" and "war game" elements seems to me pretty half-baked for a human-moderated game. As I mentioned earlier, my gut tells me that it's probably a dead end -- but I could be wrong!

Compared to the effort expected of a 3e DM? We've seen in this thread that many people believe that 4e is "less hard" for DMs by both 4e proponents and detractors.

To me, the DM is the lifeblood of any RPG and anything that makes for an easier job AND makes it more attractive to DM is great for D&D.

re: 4e as a wargame
Personally, I think this is a weird criticism of 4e. Exactly why is that "what you do BEFORE combat" should be so heavily weighted? That type of system mastery I find favours the players who tend to have more free time to master their character whereas the 4e approach of "what you do in combat actually determines half your success" favours DMs again since they don't have to worry so much about the mechanical system mastery concept.

Personally, I always despised Constructed and only play Limited on MTGO which again explains why I tend to prefer 4e.

 

[Jack99]

They worked according their own rule books, not according to the 4E one.

I don't really understand what you intend with this question as I was replying to Jacks "4E works however the DM wants it to".
The ability to houserule doesn't change the rules of the game. They are a concious decision of not following the rules in certain cases.

It is not a house-rule, it's called not following a guideline. There is a huge difference between a rule and a guideline.

Let me explain: In 4e, it is a rule that every character gets a +1 stackable bonus to (amongst others) his AC and his to-hit at every odd level.

On the other hand, that the world should conform after the players' level is merely a guideline. Guidelines for level appropriate combat is given, yes, but again, they are guidelines.

This was exactly the same in other editions. So indeed, not using a guideline is not at all the same as house-ruling.

 

[Derren]

My point is that many complaints about 4E also work as complaints about all editions of D&D. However, these days they tend to be framed as things that are wrong with 4E, and only 4E.

And yet I do not see how this applies to what you quoted.

 

[Fifth Element]

Actually, I'm not. Making up something new (prestige class, template) is working within the bounds of the rules. It also provides possible plot hooks/ideas/etc.

Handwaving something because you want it to be that way despite the rules not supporting it is a whole new animal, and one I personally don't support.

I'm just saying it's effectively the same thing. If you create a dread pirate prestige class and give it a special dodge bonus to AC, that's effectively the same as just giving the thing a higher AC. As DM, you have purview to create new stuff like this, so you effectively have the purview to simply increase an NPC's AC.

When fighting the pirate, the characters have no idea whether he has a prestige class that gives him an AC bonus, since that's a game mechanic, not an in-game thing.

 

[Fifth Element]

And yet I do not see how this applies to what you quoted.

Jack99 claimed that "Regarding this, 4e works exactly like the DM wants, just like every other edition of D&D." Essentially, 4E is like other editions in this regard.

You responded with something about how no, 4E uses the rules of 4E. While strictly correct, you're implying that the problem here is unique to 4E. It's not.