D&D 3E/3.5 4E Simulationism: Did 3.5E Really Do That Good of a Job?

[jdrakeh]

D&D of any edition has never been very simulationist -- it created its own genre conventions by borrowing little bits from sources rather than faithfully simulating them and, likewise, it has never paid much heed to verisimiltude in the form of basic physics. D&D has always been 90% Gamist with little (if any) room reserved for Simulationism or Narrativism.

 

[Lizard]

D&D of any edition has never been very simulationist -- it created its own genre conventions by borrowing little bits from sources rather than faithfully simulating them and, likewise, it has never paid much heed to verisimiltude in the form of basic physics. D&D has always been 90% Gamist with little (if any) room reserved for Simulationism or Narrativism.

I just think it's gone to 99%.

IAE, as others have said (and I've agreed) it might just be that the problem is getting used to a NEW set of idiotic contradictions right after we've finally internalized the OLD set. It may be that Actual Play (tm) sees fewer SOD-breaking circumstances than it seems from reading the rules. Shakespeare is not meant to be read, and neither are games.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Glad to be of service.

Seriously, if the game isn't pounded into the dirt in playtesting, then the playtesting isn't doing it's job.

True. But my group wasn't selected for playtesting. I got then NDAed as playtesters because I had to learn the rules to write for the game. So while we gave substantial feedback to WotC, that wasn't our primary goal.

a lot of burden for balance is being tossed back on the DMs shoulders, and I don't consider this "making his job easier".

The game must certainly provide a baseline for balance, yes. By the same token, the DM is in the game for a reason, and some balance decisions should be left in his hands.

That said, I utterly refute the notion that 4E is any harder to run or to balance on the fly than 3E was, but that's something that can't be reasonably discussed until everyone has access to the full rules set.

Putting it in 3x terms: What would you think of a DM who said, "No, you can't use telepathy, because I want to run a mystery story. I know you used it last week, but then, it was part of the plot to read the guy's mind. This week, I want to you to find the clues. No, I won't tell you why you can't, just don't!" You'd think, I suspect, he was a pretty lame DM. You'd accept him saying "Telepathy doesn't work in my world", and that's a ground rule for the campaign. You'd accept "Sure, the grand vizier is guilty. He's thinking how much fun it was to kill the prince. Too bad telepathic evidence isn't accepted in any court and unauthorized mind reading is a crime in itself. You'll have to prove your case the hard way, guys." But you won't accept fiat handwaving in the name of plot preservation -- at least, I wouldn't.

This paragraph, I agree with. All such rules changes should either be part and parcel of the campaign, or else explained with in-game reasoning, or--on occasion--explained with the DM saying "Guys, I didn't realize how power X was going to break my campaign, I'm not allowing it from here on out; feel free to pick a new power."

None of which has anything whatsoever to do with the difference between 3E and 4E.

 

[Mouseferatu]

it might just be that the problem is getting used to a NEW set of idiotic contradictions right after we've finally internalized the OLD set. It may be that Actual Play (tm) sees fewer SOD-breaking circumstances than it seems from reading the rules. Shakespeare is not meant to be read, and neither are games.

This is also a large part of it.

 

[hong]

But the question is, what does this do to the world?

The answer is, whatever is most appropriate to the continuing promotion of chewing bubblegum and/or scenery.

How would a town react to Eladrin? Would the guard shoot to kill in even the most minor of crimes, knowing they can't be held?

Maybe. Or they might not know the guy is eladrin. Or they might not know the eladrin have teleport-like powers. Or they might not know even know there's a race called "eladrin" and assume the guy is some weird mutant race. All of these are plausible alternatives, and which is the most plausible depends on you and your group.

Personally, assuming the player even let the guards catch him in the first place, I'd have them throw the eladrin into a cell. 5 minutes later he'll be out on the streets, which will provoke some confusion, cause the guards to come running after him and possibly throw him in jail again. 5 minutes later he'll be out again, causing even greater confusion. Great mirth and hilarity will ensue for all around the table, at the NPCs' expense. The eladrin will probably be a wanted fugitive in that town from then onwards, but that has never stopped D&D PCs IME. It's also a good plot hook for further adventures: maybe the eladrin gets a chance to redeem himself, or he goes on to become a notorious thorn in the side of the corrupt guards, or whatever.

Would there be lead cells (if lead blocks teleportation in 4e), or oubliettes too deep to teleport out of (assuming LOS is required)?

That could work too, if you want Gloomy Gothic Angst instead of Keystone Kops. Sounds a bit boring, though. Not enough funnay.

I want PCs to be heroes -- not gods. To have to interact with the world, not command it -- especially not at first level.

That's what 2nd level monsters are for.

 

[VannATLC]

Feyaday cages should keep those Eladrin in prison.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

Also while Eladrin are known of, they are not overly known what they are all about. I imagine since they are most comfortable in the Feywild, when travelling in our world they prefer to remain as inconspicuous as possible, preferring to blend in as much as possible.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Make a cage out of cold iron.

 

[Lizard]

Also while Eladrin are known of, they are not overly known what they are all about. I imagine since they are most comfortable in the Feywild, when travelling in our world they prefer to remain as inconspicuous as possible, preferring to blend in as much as possible.

Is this so?

From what I recall of R&C, a design element of 4e was to get away from 'racial homelands' and have most cities be mixed race, obstensibly to make forming parties easier.

So Eladrin ought to be common in human lands, as are their capabilities.

(People commented elsewhere about how anti-magic fields in 4e will screw casters more than in 3e, because now fighter/rogues retain all of their 'cool powers' but casters can still be controlled by anti-magic. One wonders if 'fighter proof' containment areas can be devised...)

 

[hong]

Is this so?

From what I recall of R&C, a design element of 4e was to get away from 'racial homelands' and have most cities be mixed race, obstensibly to make forming parties easier.

So Eladrin ought to be common in human lands, as are their capabilities.

Eladrin can be as common as you want them to be. Is this a trick question?