D&D 4E The "We Can't Roleplay" in 4E Argument

[UngeheuerLich]

You could really say: 4e is doing it all wrong...

but it really is not.

Go back and look at 1e combat... and then you will notice, that it was also very complex. weapon vs Armor, segments etc...

and then you look at the way you played it: most probably without all that bogus... the problem with 4e is the requirement for a map. This alone takes away a lot of immersion. DM fiat was the thing that allowed combat be fluent.

4e, and you can read it in the newest article, tries to make the game not needing that much DM fiat. But with players beeing able to calculate everything, you don´t try to find out, what the room looks like, what maneuvers the situation allows, as your focus is solely on how YOU as a PLAYER can improve the parties performance...

If you rely on judgement calls of the DM, you start feeling into the situation, try to find out, what he wants you to do. Finding a way to make the DM allow you to do something he did not expect.
It is a mind game. It is more than chosing a power and rolling dice.

 

[Imaro]

This is a lack of understanding/imagination, not a problem with the power or game. With a Riposte Strike you strike and your weapon remains in the forward, striking position for a quick stab if you're attacked, unlike fully withdrawing thw weapon to a more versatile or defensive position. You're not so far out of balance/position as to grant combat advantage (rogues are rather nimble fellows naturally) and you're also not going to get a major combat strike as a riposte.

So wait... now even an animal, ooze, fungus, etc. understands the forms and stances of the rogue's fighting style... uhm, yeah... ok... what?

Edit: I see you weren't addressing me specifically in your earlier post Herschel so I removed the first sentence from this post.

 

[Dausuul]

I'd love to answer that, but before I do, shouldn't we split off into another thread?

Fair point. Here it is: http://www.enworld.org/forum/genera...-edition-muscles-becmi-bones.html#post5571257

 

[Herschel]

So wait... now even an animal, ooze, fungus, etc. understands the forms and stances of the rogue's fighting style... uhm, yeah... ok... what?

Edit: I see you weren't addressing me specifically in your earlier post Herschel so I removed the first sentence from this post.

For this particular example, yeah, an animal would. I've always pictured it like Archie from "Rob Roy" where the rapier is forward after a strike in the scene. He hits you and the sword is still poised at your body. You move or come at him, a flick of the wrist gives you another cut, not a big cut, but another cut nonetheless. Any creature with instincts would be able to see that position and recognize the danger of it, just like ears flattened, body coiled, etc. The survival instinct fights against throwing yourself on a sword.

 

[Ryujin]

For this particular example, yeah, an animal would. I've always pictured it like Archie from "Rob Roy" where the rapier is forward after a strike in the scene. He hits you and the sword is still poised at your body. You move or come at him, a flick of the wrist gives you another cut, not a big cut, but another cut nonetheless. Any creature with instincts would be able to see that position and recognize the danger of it, just like ears flattened, body coiled, etc. The survival instinct fights against throwing yourself on a sword.

Yup, "No want get bit by long pointy tooth."

 

[Raven Crowking]

Then your hosed in 3e too because you need to consult that skill tree and itterative attack bonus, etc. all the time.

Agreed. Because a problem occurs in one edition, it does not follow that it did not occur in other editions (in similar, or in different, ways).

I am not at all certain where the optimal balance is between the "role-playing" and the "game" part is in "role-playing game"....even for my own purposes. But, IMHO, it lies somewhere east of 2e and west of 4e. That's a large territory to explore.

You could really say: 4e is doing it all wrong...

but it really is not.

Of course not!

I would think of it more like a pendulum, which has swung too far east with 4e, and will swing somewhat west with 5e (if I am lucky). And while that swing is too far east for me, the trip is hardly in vain. A robust 5e will have learned from 4e, even as it swings to the west......

Again, if I am lucky.


RC

 

[Imaro]

For this particular example, yeah, an animal would. I've always pictured it like Archie from "Rob Roy" where the rapier is forward after a strike in the scene. He hits you and the sword is still poised at your body. You move or come at him, a flick of the wrist gives you another cut, not a big cut, but another cut nonetheless. Any creature with instincts would be able to see that position and recognize the danger of it, just like ears flattened, body coiled, etc. The survival instinct fights against throwing yourself on a sword.

Yep, even a blind man can "see" your positioning according to the 4e rules... Face it, it's a gamist convention that can be "justified"... Until it can't.

 

[billd91]

Why? Note, he included combat and conflict. When 90% of the rules in the book revolve around either combat or conflict, making a character that shies away from both is probably not the best approach to the game.

Heck, even the "pacifist" examples in 2e are from very late 2e books that pretty much only hard core collectors have even read.

Or, put it another way, what part of "game of heroic fantasy" includes a character which doesn't embrace combat and/or conflict?

Because it's the same old badwrongfun bull that's trying to tell me how to play. D&D has always had extensive combat rules. So what? It has them because, in order to have a reasonably fair game between the PCs and the NPCs, you need more rules than you do for peaceful role playing.

But there may be many other parts of the game rules that I like even if I'm not running a combat heavy game. Who is anybody to tell me I'm playing the wrong game?

 

[Raven Crowking]

Since I noticed it quoted in Billd91's post, I will note that the pacifist options in 2e were NOT "from very late 2e books that pretty much only hard core collectors have even read" but from the Complete series that came early in 2e's run.

And I will also echo Billd91's comment about the wrongbadfun .


RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

The survival instinct fights against throwing yourself on a sword.

Unless another power is used, and then the old survival instinct goes right out the window?