Take the Narrative Wounding Challenge.

[Herremann the Wise]

Well, from what I'm reading, I would agree in your case there are a lot of build up assumptions. I can see a very clear condtradiction to your description of magic which makes me think it's more of a viseral feeling you get from pre-4E mechanics?

Perhaps its just the traditional/dungeons and dragons style our group has found itself in that we translate to any new game that we try.

What you are describing to me is perfectly possible with healing surges. The problem I seem to be running into over and over is that your perception of healing surges are based on an assumption that they are different some how from magical healing. The only difference you're offering is the visceral nature of surges.

But isn't how the surge manifests contingent upon the method/power that allows the surge to be used? I see magical healing as one method of allowing a surge to be spent as is non-magical healing as is the "adrenaline"-inspired second wind (which I do like by the way). However, the short rest mechanic allows the character to spend as many surges as they wish and this is the one that I think I have the most difficulty fitting within the narrative of my game. This is the one that has the character acting at capacity within a 5 minute rest (and full capacity within 6 hours of extended rest). Since there is no "magic" involved here but but just the natural existence of each character, I have difficulty with the whole cause and effect thing here. Why do they suddenly go to tip top shape? What natural means can cause this? If you can give me a counter example from your own game, then that may help explain further what you are driving at here.

The healing surge after a second wind is wide open for narrative explanation, adrenaline being one. The subsequent surges to get a character even remotely functional for another encounter still has to come from a triggered mechanic and most of those surge triggering mechanics, that work outside an encounter, are magical in narrative.

Are you sure? The short rest mechanic outside of combat seems entirely mundane to me rather than magical. Can you expand upon what you are thinking with this?

As for fantasy literature, despite its renown conservative streak, the rules vary from book to book. In your preferential books, do they have near death experiences?

It does vary from book to book. As much as I love the influence of Tolkien for the feel it can give, my tastes stretch also to the somewhat flippantly dire Lyonesse series of Vance, to the "personal" narratives of Hobb, the raw magnificence of Erikson's Malazan series, to Williams' Memory, Sorrow and Thorn. Perhaps of most influence though for me since late 2nd edition D&D would be George R.R. Martin and the political rivalries and personalities that drive his Ice and Fire series. Where possible, my games tend to gravitate towards elements of those above among a handful of others. As such, the threat and danger in most of these books is an ever-pressing thought in the readers mind. Skirting death near every turn? Not quite I suppose although there are obviously quite a few instances of such all told. An important element of the story when focused upon by the author.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Hungry Like The Wolf]

Perhaps its just the traditional/dungeons and dragons style our group has found itself in that we translate to any new game that we try.

I'd agree with that.

Are you sure? The short rest mechanic outside of combat seems entirely mundane to me rather than magical. Can you expand upon what you are thinking with this?

What is a short rest narrative? There is nothing saying that a short rest could be magical in nature. A cleric could be helping his companions during that rest. A short rest could be anything in a narrative.

It does vary from book to book. As much as I love the influence of Tolkien for the feel it can give, my tastes stretch also to the somewhat flippantly dire Lyonesse series of Vance, to the "personal" narratives of Hobb, the raw magnificence of Erikson's Malazan series, to Williams' Memory, Sorrow and Thorn. Perhaps of most influence though for me since late 2nd edition D&D would be George R.R. Martin and the political rivalries and personalities that drive his Ice and Fire series. Where possible, my games tend to gravitate towards elements of those above among a handful of others. As such, the threat and danger in most of these books is an ever-pressing thought in the readers mind. Skirting death near every turn? Not quite I suppose although there are obviously quite a few instances of such all told. An important element of the story when focused upon by the author.

Exactly. When the element is important to the story then the rules are thrown out or at least bent. I don't see a difference in this situation either.

If George can break his rules for undead outlaws running around lynching people then why is it not possible the bend a narrative around a function that remains totally androgynous to said narrative?

 

[Herremann the Wise]

What is a short rest narrative?

I suppose the most general way of looking at it is the PCs having a handful of minutes to get out some bandages, take a breather, have the warlord keep up morale and as you say, possibly a cleric or other leader to administer divine aid, healing or encouragement.

There is nothing saying that a short rest could be magical in nature. A cleric could be helping his companions during that rest.

But what if like our very first run of 4e you only had a warlord who could do healing? What if there is no possible "magical hook" with which to initiate the surge spending? Perhaps the cleric's helping George over there while Mildred over here is just surging up on her own? Pretty impressive stuff if she's working her way back to capacity from a serious wound and certainly one that seems to break the immersion for some groups. I suppose you could take a step back from the immediate narrative and description and have the group just say - we have a short rest with the cleric praying to Pelor healing everyone and filling them with divine vigor. But we generally prefer to stay in the moment rather than regularly stepping out of character; so a style thing again. Although what do you do when you don't have a "magical" healer? The narrative gets a little absurd when dealing with "serious" wounds under that circumstance and thus why it is easier for narrative consistency to never describe a serious wound.

Exactly. When the element is important to the story then the rules are thrown out or at least bent. I don't see a difference in this situation either.

And perhaps this is the real crux of it. Our group just simply doesn't like bending or breaking rules. Perhaps its because we are looking to the rules to inform us of what is "fair" to have happened. Perhaps that's at the heart of the difference between my group's general style and the interpretation you are suggesting?

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Hungry Like The Wolf]

But what if like our very first run of 4e you only had a warlord who could do healing?...

Again, you're assuming a lot. Who says it's not magical? A warlord could easily have a bit of divine healing, like Eugene from Band of Brothers and his reference to Cajun healers, Kord's will could easily flow through his words of inspiration and give his buddies a rapid recovery.

The disconnect, perhaps, is that you struggle to think outside the mechanical box? Lets be honest though, do you really sit through and narrate every rest or do you quickly summerise, even skip over the narrative description in these areas of the game?

And perhaps this is the real crux of it. Our group just simply doesn't like bending or breaking rules. Perhaps its because we are looking to the rules to inform us of what is "fair" to have happened. Perhaps that's at the heart of the difference between my group's general style and the interpretation you are suggesting?

You're not breaking or bending rules, you are just attributing narratives to them. The rules are still working in the same way. To clarify, I was referencing rules in the narrative sense not the mechanical sense since you explained a desire to flavour your games with a certain style of literature. I was just pointing out that even in your preferential reading, the narrative rules are still fast and loose just like in a D&D game.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I think the issue for people like herman and myself is we find both options for healing surges disrupt our enjoyment of the game. If it is mundane, then we find it lacks believability and can creste narrative inconsistencies. If it is magic that totally changes the flavor of the game for us: now my fighter suddenly has access to divine magic. For me it just feels like a mechanic that was designed for the purpose of playability at the expense of plausibility and flavor. If others find they like healing surges that is wonderful, but they just don't do it for me.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

Again, you're assuming a lot. Who says it's not magical? A warlord could easily have a bit of divine healing, like Eugene from Band of Brothers and his reference to Cajun healers, Kord's will could easily flow through his words of inspiration and give his buddies a rapid recovery.

Simply put, that was not our take on the Warlord. His power source is martial ("not magical in the traditional sense"), with a specialization in battle tactics. I can understand how if you want to play around with that as you suggest, you obviously could and have lots of fun doing it but that's not what appeared to us to be presented in the book and to have to do that so that the game could maintain the consistency we want is a little restrictive and obviously different to the ways ingrained in our usual style.

The disconnect, perhaps, is that you struggle to think outside the mechanical box?

I wouldn't exactly say struggle; I think it is more a case of simply not bothering to. The mechanics and rules have a heavy influence in the way we play. I think part of this is we get an intellectual kick out of this rules mastery perhaps. An intellectual kick out of playing a character down to the finest detail and discrimination of reaction and motive. Aside from that, all I can think in terms of a disconnect is that our outlook is guided by the podcasts we listen to, the other players we play with play, and the fora we read that support and nourish our style.

Your style while obviously different sounds like a heap of fun with its own set of intellectual kicks and rewards.

Lets be honest though, do you really sit through and narrate every rest or do you quickly summerise, even skip over the narrative description in these areas of the game?

Depends but typically most of the time. Short rests in 4e or time after combat in other editions and games is generally when we do some of our prime roleplaying in resolving what has just happened, sorting out what to do next or absorb the clues or future situation and options presented, as well as the attention required to prepare to continue on (healing opportunities). As such, pulling back and abbreviating the situation if "unimportant" happens but not all the time.

You're not breaking or bending rules, you are just attributing narratives to them. The rules are still working in the same way. To clarify, I was referencing rules in the narrative sense not the mechanical sense since you explained a desire to flavour your games with a certain style of literature. I was just pointing out that even in your preferential reading, the narrative rules are still fast and loose just like in a D&D game.

Fair enough.

And perhaps in there lies the comparison between out two styles: ours being tightly organised, yours being loose and fluid.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Hungry Like The Wolf]

I think the issue for people like herman and myself is we find both options for healing surges disrupt our enjoyment of the game. If it is mundane, then we find it lacks believability and can creste narrative inconsistencies. If it is magic that totally changes the flavor of the game for us: now my fighter suddenly has access to divine magic. For me it just feels like a mechanic that was designed for the purpose of playability at the expense of plausibility and flavor. If others find they like healing surges that is wonderful, but they just don't do it for me.

So it's simply visceral. Which is what I said earlier. However, there are some flaws in your representation of healing surges and a lot of it has to do with built up assumptions over, what I assume, is years of play.

That's fine but I'm not going to stop trying to show you how your assumptions are making your criticism a little off.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

I think the issue for people like herman and myself is we find both options for healing surges disrupt our enjoyment of the game. If it is mundane, then we find it lacks believability and can creste narrative inconsistencies. If it is magic that totally changes the flavor of the game for us: now my fighter suddenly has access to divine magic. For me it just feels like a mechanic that was designed for the purpose of playability at the expense of plausibility and flavor. If others find they like healing surges that is wonderful, but they just don't do it for me.

This is in the main true for me (although for me I actually like the idea of surges, just not some of the rules surrounding their employment and implementation).

However to use a Jack Vance term, something about the way Hungry Like The Wolf was saying what he was saying gave me the scurch that there was something his group were doing that my group generally did not. The context within the way that Hungry Like The Wolf plays is incredibly important to understanding why universally intelligent people were finding it so hard to reach any form of real accord on this thread. And with a careful examination of how our different groups play, I think the last few posts have begun to partially uncover the source(s) of the difficulty.

I certainly believe that this group has helped my understand not what my group is doing wrong, but what they are doing different to some of the other posters and to appreciate the many different flavours of playing the games we do.

Good discussion if you ask me.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Bedrockgames]

So it's simply visceral. Which is what I said earlier. However, there are some flaws in your representation of healing surges and a lot of it has to do with built up assumptions over, what I assume, is years of play.

That's fine but I'm not going to stop trying to show you how your assumptions are making your criticism a little off.

I don't think it is simply visceral or arbitrary. It is a matter of taste but i've gamed long enough to know what kinds of approaches to design and what kinds of mechanics I like. 4e, particularly healing surges place a serious strain for me in terms of not only believability but playability too. I actually don't like how they alter gameplay (lots of people enjoy tgem because tgey enable you to get back into the adventure quickly, but that isn't what I am after). For what it is worth I don't think my assumptions here are flawed. Others have offered alternative explanations for how healing surges could work and I just find the arguments unconvincing.

 

[Hungry Like The Wolf]

Simply put, that was not our take on the Warlord...

I was unaware that power sources had any relevance in narrative space. If a warlord is barred from divine ability then is a wizard barred from martial ability because they are from an arcane power source?

I wouldn't exactly say struggle; I think it is more a case of simply not bothering to. The mechanics and rules have a heavy influence in the way we play. I think part of this is we get an intellectual kick out of this rules mastery perhaps. An intellectual kick out of playing a character down to the finest detail and discrimination of reaction and motive. Aside from that, all I can think in terms of a disconnect is that our outlook is guided by the podcasts we listen to, the other players we play with play, and the fora we read that support and nourish our style.

I can understand this. Although, I don't see how what I purpose changes how the mechanics work, at all. Perhaps you could elaborate how narrative chances the way the mechanics work? Because I feel a real disconnect between fluff and mechanics.

Depends but typically most of the time. Short rests in 4e or time after combat in other editions and games is generally when we do some of our prime roleplaying in resolving what has just happened, sorting out what to do next or absorb the clues or future situation and options presented, as well as the attention required to prepare to continue on (healing opportunities). As such, pulling back and abbreviating the situation if "unimportant" happens but not all the time.

So how much of it, honestly, is spent narrating healing? I understand exactly what you're saying but that description seems very light on healing narrative and more on planning/teamwork narrative.

Fair enough.

And perhaps in there lies the comparison between out two styles: ours being tightly organised, yours being loose and fluid.

You lost me. It wasn't a comment on my playstyle but yours. The literature you enjoy is loose and fluid with narrative.