The "real" reason the game has changed.

[Hussar]

OK YOU as the DM have more time to work on story, but how about your players, and what goes on with/during the game?

How much does storytelling get explained in the books as opposed to the combat? How much of a story can the players tell around the rules as presented? Are they hindered in any way to tell particular stories because of difficulties created by the rules.

Before or after playing, tying some kind of story to what is going to happen, or what happened is not too hard, even if it does pose some problems, but how well are your players able to tell their own characters story through play and during play?

I'm not Mort, but I'll take a stab at this.

I agree that storytelling is, compared to 3e, pretty much the same IME. I can't really compare it to my 2e or 1e days, mostly because it's just so long ago, and mostly because I'm no longer a student with lots and lots of free time to devote to gaming. Heck, back in high school, we'd pull all night gaming sessions. I just can't do that anymore, so, there will be a fair difference there.

Personally, I find that since mechanics have been divorced from flavour, it becomes much easier to bring my character forward than in 3e. In one example, my somewhat insane rogue believes that he is a disciple of Kord and that his wooden spoon was once used by His Mighty Thews to eat from the character's stewpot. To open locks, I simply tap them with the "holy" relic and they pop open. That sort of thing.

Shazman - on in combat role play. I'd say that it depends on my mood to be honest. Sometimes I really try, and sometimes I'm just too lazy. Pretty much the same as always.

However, I have found that I do engage the personality of the character and mesh it with the mechanics to a fairly large degree. The aforementioned rogue, for example, has a life draining dagger - killing an opponent grants 5 temp hit points - so every time the rogue scores a kill, I dedicate it to Kord.

Although, I am running out of adjectives and body parts to dedicate things to. "Be embraced by the mighty thews of Kord!" "May the hairy thighs of Kord grant you mercy!" That sort of thing.

So, no, I don't think that the mechanics pose any significant limitation on role play.

BTW, for anyone masochistic enough, we have actual audio recordings of our sessions.

 

[Mort]

So the "skill challenge" system, or something else outside of combat, is encouraging them to roleplay, as opposed to 3rd where it was just picking a mechanical ability to get them out of a jam?

The skill challenge system and the lack of a quick spell for every situation, yes (by the late 3e days my players and I were calling it "the 6 second solution" to nearly every problem). Heck a few sessions ago my players lowered a rope and climbed down a wall, as opposed to the 3e - everyone feather fall, levitate, fly, dimension door, etc (it always struck me as too casual magic, which is great for some worlds, not so great for others).

How about the story telling via combat? Is it still about your players just using the mechanics, or are they being creative to do things that may not be spelled out with the mechanics?

This is an interesting one. I think 4e has some better rules for improvisation than 3e (page 42 etc.) BUT because the powers seem so codified and ingrained it might be hard for people to "go off script" as it were. I've certainly noticed, especially early on, that I had to remind players they were not limited to the actions spelled out on their power cards durring combat (they are in big letters, sometimes even in color).

But this loses sight of the bigger issue - 4e has no less tools for plot and game development than 3e did. Now the feel will quite likely be different, because the mechanics are very different from prior edditions, and it's certainly not to everyone's tastes - but different does not mean worse.

 

[shadzar]

OK to both, how well does the healing mechanics in 4th allow you and your players to tell a story? Would you expect anyone to be at a real threat and out of commission, or just wake up fresh as a daisy tomorrow?

Does health play a concern in your story telling?

I will let others fight over 3rd and 4th, I am just wondering about 4th specifically since it has been a while now that it has been out.

To me it just seems you have to shape the story around the mechanics more than other editions.

 

[Hussar]

OK to both, how well does the healing mechanics in 4th allow you and your players to tell a story? Would you expect anyone to be at a real threat and out of commission, or just wake up fresh as a daisy tomorrow?

Does health play a concern in your story telling?

I will let others fight over 3rd and 4th, I am just wondering about 4th specifically since it has been a while now that it has been out.

To me it just seems you have to shape the story around the mechanics more than other editions.

Not even a little to be honest. It's no different than any other edition in my mind. The only difference being, no one has to fall on the Cleric Grenade to make sure that everyone is fresh as a daisy the next day.

That being said, I did lose a PC recently to a disease - three days, spiraling downward and three failed saves left my PC comatose (I can't remember the exact disease - something you get from rats). That certainly had a pretty serious effect on role playing. And it still has actually. The character later returned to the game after getting a cure disease ritual and I continue to play him as having been weakened by the effects of that disease.

I'm not sure why you would think that you have to shape the story around the mechanics more to be honest. Since the mechanics are largely independent of any flavour, you can shape your story however you want - the wound you took in battle hurt like heck during the fight, but is largely just a scratch afterwards. Which is generally how it works in fiction as well - the hero gets the stuffing beaten out of him, wins by the skin of his teeth, limps away and is good to go by the next scene.

I mean, how many action stories have you seen or read where the hero suffers broken teeth and a shattered jaw after being punched in the face repeately?

 

[LostSoul]

OK to both, how well does the healing mechanics in 4th allow you and your players to tell a story? Would you expect anyone to be at a real threat and out of commission, or just wake up fresh as a daisy tomorrow?

I think that 4E is pretty focused on creating action movie heroes and playing through their exploits. A little over the top, maybe a bad-ass but nothing that really pushes any boundaries (I can be a Warlock who signed a Pact with the Devil to gain powers - but I use those powers against him!), always fighting and coming out on top against "all odds".

In that case, you want the heroes to get right back up after taking a beating. It's part of the genre.

To me it just seems you have to shape the story around the mechanics more than other editions.

I don't know about other editions, but I think that's always the case. I consider that a sign of a well-designed game, actually (the opposite is a toolkit that requires the group to bring the game).

 

[LostSoul]

I mean, how many action stories have you seen or read where the hero suffers broken teeth and a shattered jaw after being punched in the face repeately?

Noir tends to do this. Brick jumps to mind, so does The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo.

 

[Mort]

OK to both, how well does the healing mechanics in 4th allow you and your players to tell a story? Would you expect anyone to be at a real threat and out of commission, or just wake up fresh as a daisy tomorrow?

The difference between 4e and 3e on this front is an illusion. In 3e the cleric simply unloads all of his healing spells before a rest (or converts any spells left into healing etc.) and everyone rises "fresh as a daisy" as you put it - 4e merely took away the handwaiving. As to being out of commission, the healing surge mechanic provides a way for the players to really feal threatened. I've been reading a lot of Robert E. Howard's Conan recently and the healing surge mechanic would actually do the storytelling justice. If nothing else, it FINALY separates healing from clerics and divine magic so the group does not have to be so reliant on the healer at any level worth mentioning.

Does health play a concern in your story telling?

Often yes. The 4e mechanic is actually not bad for this, from a modeling standpoint. For example a few sessions ago 2 PCs were afflicted with filth fever. Suddenly extended rests become a bit dangerous: You have to make an endurance check - failing 1 means -2 to all defenses, failing 2 (after a 2nd extended rest) means -2 to all defenses means loss of all healing surges until cured! Poisons have a similar track.

A person with the heal skill may substitute it for the endurance check.

Plus the cure disease ritual is actually quite cool (I wish they used the mechanic with more rituals) - The healer rolls a heal skill and the result dictates how much damage (or outright death) the target suffers. The cure may well be worse than the disease, making it interesting as opposed to a button to simply push.

So IME - health has taken more of a center stage (for the better IMO) than it used to.

To me it just seems you have to shape the story around the mechanics more than other editions.

Again, maybe it's because I'm running ebberron but the mechanics have been getting in the way less than they used to (btw reading the Darksun stuff, I can see the mechanics fitting quite well too).

 

[Mort]

Not even a little to be honest. It's no different than any other edition in my mind. The only difference being, no one has to fall on the Cleric Grenade to make sure that everyone is fresh as a daisy the next day.

That being said, I did lose a PC recently to a disease - three days, spiraling downward and three failed saves left my PC comatose (I can't remember the exact disease - something you get from rats). That certainly had a pretty serious effect on role playing. And it still has actually. The character later returned to the game after getting a cure disease ritual and I continue to play him as having been weakened by the effects of that disease.

I'm not sure why you would think that you have to shape the story around the mechanics more to be honest. Since the mechanics are largely independent of any flavour, you can shape your story however you want - the wound you took in battle hurt like heck during the fight, but is largely just a scratch afterwards. Which is generally how it works in fiction as well - the hero gets the stuffing beaten out of him, wins by the skin of his teeth, limps away and is good to go by the next scene.

I mean, how many action stories have you seen or read where the hero suffers broken teeth and a shattered jaw after being punched in the face repeately?

Ok that's twice you posted nearly the identical thing to what I was about to - only this time I actually posted before I saw yours. Do I need to run a virus scan on my computer edit: seriously, I guess our experience just runs in the same direction!

 

[BryonD]

Personally, I find that since mechanics have been divorced from flavour, it becomes much easier to bring my character forward than in 3e. In one example, my somewhat insane rogue believes that he is a disciple of Kord and that his wooden spoon was once used by His Mighty Thews to eat from the character's stewpot. To open locks, I simply tap them with the "holy" relic and they pop open. That sort of thing.

You seem to be suggesting that this is something you could not have done in 3E. Is that what you are saying? And if so, why?

So, no, I don't think that the mechanics pose any significant limitation on role play.

Absolutely correct.
Though I see see in your description the completely typical 4E "pop quiz" roleplaying in which the mechanics describe an event and you role play to match it.

There is nothing wrong with that.

But, if someone prefers the idea that the mechanics should stay completely out of the way and the player should role play whatever, and only then do the mechanics come in to model the chosen behavior, then that person is going to find other systems far more satisfying.

It isn't a matter of right or wrong, but it is a very legitimate matter of difference in taste.

That seems to be the point of contention. Over and over 4E fans demand that they are role playing just as much as anyone else. I don't doubt that. But they ALSO demand that there is no difference. And then they go on to describe this "pop quiz" style. It is a huge difference.

I understand that many people may not PERCEIVE the difference. I also fully respect that many people may have been playing 3E this way all along. But the difference is there. And the encamped portion of the 4E fanbase's refusal to admit that this difference exist is one the the critical elements of the unending back and forth.

 

[Mort]

You seem to be suggesting that this is something you could not have done in 3E. Is that what you are saying? And if so, why?



Absolutely correct.
Though I see see in your description the completely typical 4E "pop quiz" roleplaying in which the mechanics describe an event and you role play to match it.

There is nothing wrong with that.

But, if someone prefers the idea that the mechanics should stay completely out of the way and the player should role play whatever, and only then do the mechanics come in to model the chosen behavior, then that person is going to find other systems far more satisfying.

It isn't a matter of right or wrong, but it is a very legitimate matter of difference in taste.

That seems to be the point of contention. Over and over 4E fans demand that they are role playing just as much as anyone else. I don't doubt that. But they ALSO demand that there is no difference. And then they go on to describe this "pop quiz" style. It is a huge difference.

I understand that many people may not PERCEIVE the difference. I also fully respect that many people may have been playing 3E this way all along. But the difference is there. And the encamped portion of the 4E fanbase's refusal to admit that this difference exist is one the the critical elements of the unending back and forth.

It is a rare game where mechanics don't infuence and/or even dictate playstyle and 4e certainly isn't one of them, then again neither was 3e. You are correct that taste is going to dictate your preference here.