Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 4136931" data-attributes="member: 4937">Well, I strongly suspected that you did. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />There is nothing wrong with that.&nbsp; I'm just being very open about the fact that I play lots of traditional card games, collectible card games, modern and classic strategy board games, PnP and computer war games, and sports and tend to have been parts of gaming groups where this was true of everyone.&nbsp; Hense, a certain amount of player challenge is inherent in my reason for gaming.&nbsp; That isn't to say that I care nothing for emmersion or role play.&nbsp; If I did, I'd stick to games designed to be fair and competitive rather than playing RPG's, but it does mean that I'm willing to sacrifice a certain level of pure simulationism for the sake of what I consider important game play.&nbsp; I don't want to figure out the answer to the riddle by rolling against, &quot;Knowledge (Puzzles and Enigmas)&quot;.&nbsp; I want to figure out the riddle.&nbsp; I'm willing to put up with a bit of well constructed 'pixel bitching' (as one opponent of this style of play calls it).&nbsp; I like adventure games.&nbsp; Heck, I like 'Humongous Cave' and 'Zork'.&nbsp; I'm willing to tolerate some DM fiat in exchange for resolving social interaction through elaborate in character conversations which depend on player wit and intelligence, rather than letting my character persuade the reluctant noblemen with a diplomacy check.The good thing AFAIC is that traditionally, D&amp;D has let each individual table resolve these question for themselves.&nbsp; The D&amp;D rules typically take a very loose stand on these technicalities of play, so if you want to play D&amp;D as high simulationism or D&amp;D according to its gamist wargaming roots the rules would do little to get in the way.&nbsp; Whether that is going to change and some groups will no longer find thier preferred style of play supported in 4e remains to be seen.&nbsp;&nbsp; Oddly, my principal complaint with 4e seems to be that its swinging too far toward 'pure player challenge' and away from 'emmersiveness'.&nbsp; So its highly possible that you'll be even less happy with 4e's emphasis on tactical board gaming than I am.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 4136931, member: 4937"] Well, I strongly suspected that you did. :D There is nothing wrong with that. I'm just being very open about the fact that I play lots of traditional card games, collectible card games, modern and classic strategy board games, PnP and computer war games, and sports and tend to have been parts of gaming groups where this was true of everyone. Hense, a certain amount of player challenge is inherent in my reason for gaming. That isn't to say that I care nothing for emmersion or role play. If I did, I'd stick to games designed to be fair and competitive rather than playing RPG's, but it does mean that I'm willing to sacrifice a certain level of pure simulationism for the sake of what I consider important game play. I don't want to figure out the answer to the riddle by rolling against, "Knowledge (Puzzles and Enigmas)". I want to figure out the riddle. I'm willing to put up with a bit of well constructed 'pixel bitching' (as one opponent of this style of play calls it). I like adventure games. Heck, I like 'Humongous Cave' and 'Zork'. I'm willing to tolerate some DM fiat in exchange for resolving social interaction through elaborate in character conversations which depend on player wit and intelligence, rather than letting my character persuade the reluctant noblemen with a diplomacy check. The good thing AFAIC is that traditionally, D&D has let each individual table resolve these question for themselves. The D&D rules typically take a very loose stand on these technicalities of play, so if you want to play D&D as high simulationism or D&D according to its gamist wargaming roots the rules would do little to get in the way. Whether that is going to change and some groups will no longer find thier preferred style of play supported in 4e remains to be seen. Oddly, my principal complaint with 4e seems to be that its swinging too far toward 'pure player challenge' and away from 'emmersiveness'. So its highly possible that you'll be even less happy with 4e's emphasis on tactical board gaming than I am. [/QUOTE]

Verification