Did WotC underestimate the Paizo effect on 4E?

Ok, so they die immidiately when the hero shows up, never being seen petrifying anyone.

See, that's the thing about stories. There is no balance or math. It's a story. There's no game mechanics behind it. If you want things to be "like the stories" then you never roll a single die.

The medusa was described as someone who could petrify, but shown as someone who dies like a chump as soon as the protagonist shows up.

There is no gamist vs simulationist divide. The terms are utterly meaningless.

The head of Medusa was shown to petrify Cetus the sea serpent, Phineas (betrothed to Andromeda), and Polydectes (who was pursuing Perseus' mother).

That said, I tihnk you have it backward. The stories came first. The game engines were built to emulate the stories in game form. How well and what part of the stories get emulated vary from game engine to game engine.

From the story of Medusa, those confronted with her head don't get 3+ rounds of action before petrification and they don't manage to shake the effect off.

So which game engine better emulates that story?
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Ok, so they die immidiately when the hero shows up, never being seen petrifying anyone.
Heh. The fairly recent History Channel Clash of the Gods series included a segment on Medusa. According to it, when the story was first being told everyone understood that SOMETHING was so awful that it turned everyone to stone and that something had once been Medusa. But, since everyone who had every seen it had turned to stone, no one had any idea what it actually looked like. So it was that much more scary.

Now, the modern archetype is clearly different and, being a modern kinda guy, go with that. But I do find this alternate very appealing as well.

See, that's the thing about stories. There is no balance or math. It's a story. There's no game mechanics behind it.
With you so far.

If you want things to be "like the stories" then you never roll a single die.
Nope, that is where you are wrong. I'll get back to this.

The medusa was described as someone who could petrify, but shown as someone who dies like a chump as soon as the protagonist shows up.
Not really. There were lots of protagonists who got turned to stone. Medusa was very potent. Perseus is the one who finally came along and beat her. But the establishment that she was so vastly far from being a chump is a critical piece of the story and why the Perseus myth became a lasting legend.

There is no gamist vs simulationist divide. The terms are utterly meaningless.
You seem to fail to grasp that there are stories, tactical mini games, and a third group activities which, for lack of a better term, my friends and I refer to as role playing games. Now, I realize that you also use that term, so you'll need to be careful there. I'll substitute Story Acting Events (SAEs) for when I'm talking about what I do. You can have ownership of RPGs for this conversation.

Now in the SAEs, these are games like a story. And they do involve rolling dice. And part of the reason is that, like Perseus, the players (and their characters) HOPE to be the guy who finally beats the very potent monster and make it, for once, look like a chump. But, they just might be one of the many that fell to Medusa along the way. There is a huge difference between the story teller and listener knowing how it ended, and being in Perseus shoes before the story is over.

You seem convinced that this concept is not only not what you do (which is fine), but that it doesn't even exist.

When you say that being like a story involves never rolling a die, the only thing you clearly communicate is that you have never experienced what I'm talking about.

And when you challenge me on it, but also insist that the terms gamist and simulationist are "utterly meaningless", you make it clear that it is hopeless. You can ask me to explain calculus to you as well. But, if you ground conditions are that you have never done any algebra and FURTHER you insist that the idea of ever using a letter in a math equation is implausible. Yeah, within the bizarre boundary conditions you demand, calculus does not exist. Go enjoy that.

In the mean time, there is some fun for the rest of us to derive.
 
Last edited:

See I think your biggest probblem, and probably a divide between players of D&D is the old... "destined to be a hero" vs. "the chance to be a hero." You see the only person who killed medusa in the story was Perseus... the hero.
Exactly right.

Being the hero is a ton of fun. But there are some GREAT memories of losing as well.

And failing in the effort is far more fun than an expected victory.
 

Its the old "gamist vs. simulationist" divide.

What's D&D simulating, in this 'simulationist' version of yours? It's not medusa, or there'd be no saving throw involved. You either know the secret or you die.

Ok, so they die immidiately when the hero shows up, never being seen petrifying anyone.

Well, technically all the other 'heroes' died. The one who turned up with his immunity on won. Those are the two possibilities, if you want a strictly 'simulationist' approach. And since a lot of gamers know the secret of immunity, medusa just isn't scary any more. Everyone can turn up with god-mode on.
 

What's D&D simulating, in this 'simulationist' version of yours? It's not medusa, or there'd be no saving throw involved. You either know the secret or you die.

I always skinned the save as representing whether you looked medusa in the eyes or not. I mean if you keep your eyes closed, at least in 3.x, her gaze attack is partially or fully negated...

Well, technically all the other 'heroes' died. The one who turned up with his immunity on won. Those are the two possibilities, if you want a strictly 'simulationist' approach. And since a lot of gamers know the secret of immunity, medusa just isn't scary any more. Everyone can turn up with god-mode on.

There is no immunity... you can try to avert your eyes whenever you would look at her, but that only reduces your chances of looking into her eyes by 50%... in fact even if you keep your eyes closed you still have to fight her and with hefty penalties... so how are there only two possibilities? Fighting a medusa with total concealment against you is still pretty damn scary in my book...
 

You can ask me to explain calculus to you as well. But, if you ground conditions are that you have never done any algebra and FURTHER you insist that the idea of ever using a letter in a math equation is implausible. Yeah, within the bizarre boundary conditions you demand, calculus does not exist. Go enjoy that.

In the mean time, there is some fun for the rest of us to derive.
Well, deriving fun in an integral part of calculus...
 

What's D&D simulating, in this 'simulationist' version of yours? It's not medusa, or there'd be no saving throw involved. You either know the secret or you die.

Bingo.

Perseus never had a saving throw. There was no math. There was no gaming system. He knew the trick and killed the medusa with ease.

That's how SoD works. You know the trick and the monster isn't scary, or you don't know the trick and the monster still isn't scary, the dice are.

Sorry, I don't see the huge and amazing story behind "Sorry you rolled a 5, you die.

Incidentally, calculus can be mathematically proven. Go on and prove the "simulationist vs gamist" divide.
 

That's how SoD works. You know the trick and the monster isn't scary, or you don't know the trick and the monster still isn't scary, the dice are.

:erm: Its pretend.

We are pretending that the PCs are meeting a medusa and in that context it is the medusa, not the dice, that are scary.
 

Bingo.

Perseus never had a saving throw. There was no math. There was no gaming system. He knew the trick and killed the medusa with ease.

That's how SoD works. You know the trick and the monster isn't scary, or you don't know the trick and the monster still isn't scary, the dice are.

Sorry, I don't see the huge and amazing story behind "Sorry you rolled a 5, you die.

Incidentally, calculus can be mathematically proven. Go on and prove the "simulationist vs gamist" divide.

Or if one wanted to look at it in a different light... Perseus was the only one who did make his Saving Throw... and on top of that his attack was a critical with maximum damage... :D ...nothing in the movie or story contradicts this interpretation.

His men on the other hand (again using Clash of the Titans since it's the most modern incarnation of medusa) do not get slowly turned to stone and none of them that succumb fight it off later. So what exactly is the 4e version even based on?
 


Remove ads

Top