Hussar
Legend
Pick a skill and roll it is certainly how a skill challenge is resolved. Fair enough. But, if that's all you did for a skill challenge, then yes, you did it wrong.
The D&D Experience (or, All Roads lead to Rome)
- Thread starter Mercurius
- Start date
Pick a skill and roll it is certainly how a skill challenge is resolved. Fair enough. But, if that's all you did for a skill challenge, then yes, you did it wrong.
Aberzanzorax
Hero
Ok.
Well, we did do more. We roleplayed during it. (For what it's worth, I like the idea and some of the implementation of skill challenges in 4e...I think it's a nice design element that was brought to D&D by 4e).
But the point there is that we didn't HAVE to roleplay. Similar to WoW.
(EDIT: and let me be clear...I don't think 4e = WoW or that there is no roleplaying in 4e. I just am following this line of discussion to point out that it's not even clear if WoW is an RPG, much less D&D. I will say that I play WoW, and that it does help scratch my D&D itch, but I wouldn't call it D&D or "Rome"...though maybe I should based on the OP and the itch being scratched?)
Well, we did do more. We roleplayed during it. (For what it's worth, I like the idea and some of the implementation of skill challenges in 4e...I think it's a nice design element that was brought to D&D by 4e).
But the point there is that we didn't HAVE to roleplay. Similar to WoW.
(EDIT: and let me be clear...I don't think 4e = WoW or that there is no roleplaying in 4e. I just am following this line of discussion to point out that it's not even clear if WoW is an RPG, much less D&D. I will say that I play WoW, and that it does help scratch my D&D itch, but I wouldn't call it D&D or "Rome"...though maybe I should based on the OP and the itch being scratched?)
But the skill challenge was an encounter with the two guards at the city gate, and "An encounter with two guards at the city gate isn’t fun."
So expediting it via quickest resolution method to get to the fun is wrong?
Lalato
Adventurer
Yeah... but, strictly speaking, you don't have to roleplay in ANY edition of D&D. D&D has ALWAYS been based on the combat mechanics. D&D was born with combat in mind and so it rewards combat more than anything else. That's EVERY edition of D&D... not just 4e.
Why is it that 4e gets singled out for this?
Aberzanzorax
Hero
I dunno why it gets singled out...maybe because the focus is more strongly on "the encounter" and "not the encounter" the way the mechanics work? (Not that people need to play it this way, I've seen it played without this imposed dichotomy).
I was merely pointing out that all of the examples that Hussar gave that made WoW "not an RPG" also apply to 4e. They do not all apply to any other D&D version, though. So, in this thread, and in this discussion, that's why I'm singling out 4e.
I was merely pointing out that all of the examples that Hussar gave that made WoW "not an RPG" also apply to 4e. They do not all apply to any other D&D version, though. So, in this thread, and in this discussion, that's why I'm singling out 4e.
Last edited:
Hussar
Legend
Wow, nothing like quoting out of context to feed the flames huh? How about actually going back and reading the 4e DMG and more than just the single line that gets trotted out for edition wars and seeing what the book actually says.
-----------------
WoW isn't an RPG because there's no presumption of R. I don't know how to put it more simply than that. Nothing in the game actually presumes that you are going to play your character. It's no different than Monopoly in this sense. Sure, you can role play in Monopoly but that doesn't make it an RPG.
The entire 4e DMG revolves around the presumption of adopting a role. Every bit of advice flows from that basic assumption. Page 42 examples come from the idea that the player is making role play decisions, not based on what is the most tactically advantageous, but on what would make a good story.
The artifacts rules are almost entirely role play based. The whole artifact reaction rules depend on the player acting out his character.
To me, this is pretty fundamental to what differentiates a CRPG from an RPG.
-----------
The thing that blows my mind about "It just doesn't feel like D&D to me" is that it's so hard to defend. I can play:
- an anthropomorphic hippo flying a spaceship using the Skills and Powers 2e rules.
- a demigod halfling using the Immortals rules.
- a gestalt gnomish binder/wizard using the 3e ruleset and 14 different 3rd party splatbooks
- a human thief
- a fighting man.
and say that I'm playing D&D and no one bats an eye. But, I play a Dragonborn warlord and suddenly it's not D&D anymore? Really? There are more differences between edition in those editions considered "D&D" than there are between 3e and 4e, yet, suddenly 4e is out in the cold?
The other thing is, if 4e isn't D&D, why is 3e? After all, people told me for years that 3e wasn't really D&D. Why are you suddenly right when they are wrong?
Maybe it is what you consider the R in RPG that is flawed?
4th edition has clearly defined R correct?
Defender, Striker, Controller, and Leader.
Are you saying WoW doesn't have an equivalent? What NWN and DDO doesn't have something equivalent to a role that you are playing?
This is why Rome burned. Too many people just walking down the road and not paying attention to what was going on around them.
So basically the "D&D Experience" is that nothing can be shared because the flames will in the end engulf it. While some are trying to decide and figure out what a "role" is others are trying to figure out where the "property lines" are and nobody has noticed before it is too late, that the flames are coming and cannot be stopped, because they come fast. It is inevitable.
So you choice is to stay in Rome if you survived and help rebuild it and enjoy YOUR Rome, or leave with your memory of Rome and discuss it with others of the same memory. Should you meet someone coming from the rebuilt Rome, you may be able to accept its location, but do not feel it to be Rome just because it was built in the same location....or with the same product name in the case of D&D. Someone from the rebuilt Rome doesn't need to be offended that someone else doesn't feel it is Rome anymore.
No one ever has to understand anothers feelings in order to accept them as the feelings of that person.
FYI, yes I am tired of the analogy and figured I would give my take on it...
Last edited:
Well, in my case, I don't (except as a matter of curiosity).
But I do get a bit annoyed when I get told (either directly or by implication) that my game is not really an RPG, or is in various way deficient as an RPG, or is just a minis skirmish game with a random collection of encounters, or . . .
If people have that view of my game, fine. But when I'm trying to post about and discuss my game on an RPG discussion board, I could easily cope without having such views shared with me!
Similar Threads
