Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
4e: the new paradigm
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 4112166" data-attributes="member: 2067"><p>I never said it did. In fact, 4e would STILL encourage you to have a character.</p><p></p><p>It just encourages your character to be defined by the things it does, rather than the things it is. </p><p></p><p>3e doesn't prevent you from having a story happen. In fact, 3e ENCOURAGES you to have a story happen.</p><p></p><p>It just encourages that story to be grounded in the whys and wherefores of it's main protagonists and antagonists.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes, I agree. 3e's "background" got in the way of some of that narrative sometimes, and it has been a major annoyance for some people ("I've gotta count out ALL THESE SKILL POINTS!!!" "How many feats does my 24 HD aberration get?!"). 4e is trimming that as fat, but, IMO, seems to be throwing out some babies with the bathwater here. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, let's take one of my favorite points of 4e, the skill system we've seen for noncombat resolution.</p><p></p><p>According to the recent blog posts, escape from sembia, et al, 4e's method has you choose a skill, explain how you would use it to accomplish the goal, and roll to accomplish it. You choose how great of a success you want -- bigger successes have greater chances of failure, but also help you get more successes down the road. As you gain more "successes," you gradually emerge from the encounter victorious. </p><p></p><p>That's action focused. Something is happening, you choose how you would try and resolve this. You choose what you're good at, presumably, and you explain how that would help you. If your explanation is valid (DM arbitration, probably with a lot of advice), you get to try it. If you get away with it, you are closer to victory, if you fail, you are farther away, but if you get away with it enough, you achieve victory. </p><p></p><p>The action comes at you, you react to it, you emerge and are ready for the next "scene."</p><p></p><p>Versus 3e's method.</p><p></p><p>At every level, you assign skill points to become good at something. The skills themselves tell you what the various DC's are for various things, so you can directly measure how good you are. 20 ranks in Climb means that you can take 10 and climb up wet vinyl (or whatever). This becomes character knowledge, it's character-focused: you can accopmlish task X, if task X ever comes up. A good DM would learn your abilities and present Task X to you in an interesting way, but even if he doesn't, you can still use your skill. You know you can climb that tall pine tree with 20 ranks and the ability to take 10. A cliffside or most castle walls aren't too hard, so if the mage flies to the top of his spire, you can either enter his trap-filled corridoor, or you can climb up the outside like a badass. This means that your character drives the story -- task X can only be accomplished by certain characters, and you happen to be one of them, so you accoplish the task and move forward with the tale.</p><p></p><p>You have an ability, and can actively "bring the action." The enemy might have to react to you. If the DM does bring the action to you, he brings it to you knowing full well how likely you are to be able to do it. Your choice isn't in how much you risk, it's in how you build your character from the beginning. </p><p></p><p>That's very character-focused. It's about what capabilities you have. </p><p></p><p>The "attention," for better or worse, in 4e, isn't on what you can do. </p><p></p><p>Take the Trip power for example. Once per encounter, you can try to trip someone. Obviously, you don't magically loose the ability to trip someone after you use the power, nor do your tripping muscles cramp up, nor does your enemy somehow gain a magic five-minute memory that renders all trip attempts ineffeicient. Even though it's a per-encounter power, in-character, you don't somehow "loose" the ability to perform a trip except for one small window in every 5-minute span. It's not about what your character can do.</p><p></p><p>It's about what your character DOES do. You only ACTUALLY trip once per encounter, regardless of how often you're actually able to in-character. The action is where the attention is -- on the fact that you DO it, not on your ability to do it (or lack thereof). </p><p></p><p>It's not a binary system, it's a continuum -- you need both to make an RPG worth playing. 4e seems to be very differently weighted on this scale than 3e was. And, rather than G/N/S, I think this is a stronger difference between the editions (since G/N/S is all but useless).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 4112166, member: 2067"] I never said it did. In fact, 4e would STILL encourage you to have a character. It just encourages your character to be defined by the things it does, rather than the things it is. 3e doesn't prevent you from having a story happen. In fact, 3e ENCOURAGES you to have a story happen. It just encourages that story to be grounded in the whys and wherefores of it's main protagonists and antagonists. Yes, I agree. 3e's "background" got in the way of some of that narrative sometimes, and it has been a major annoyance for some people ("I've gotta count out ALL THESE SKILL POINTS!!!" "How many feats does my 24 HD aberration get?!"). 4e is trimming that as fat, but, IMO, seems to be throwing out some babies with the bathwater here. Well, let's take one of my favorite points of 4e, the skill system we've seen for noncombat resolution. According to the recent blog posts, escape from sembia, et al, 4e's method has you choose a skill, explain how you would use it to accomplish the goal, and roll to accomplish it. You choose how great of a success you want -- bigger successes have greater chances of failure, but also help you get more successes down the road. As you gain more "successes," you gradually emerge from the encounter victorious. That's action focused. Something is happening, you choose how you would try and resolve this. You choose what you're good at, presumably, and you explain how that would help you. If your explanation is valid (DM arbitration, probably with a lot of advice), you get to try it. If you get away with it, you are closer to victory, if you fail, you are farther away, but if you get away with it enough, you achieve victory. The action comes at you, you react to it, you emerge and are ready for the next "scene." Versus 3e's method. At every level, you assign skill points to become good at something. The skills themselves tell you what the various DC's are for various things, so you can directly measure how good you are. 20 ranks in Climb means that you can take 10 and climb up wet vinyl (or whatever). This becomes character knowledge, it's character-focused: you can accopmlish task X, if task X ever comes up. A good DM would learn your abilities and present Task X to you in an interesting way, but even if he doesn't, you can still use your skill. You know you can climb that tall pine tree with 20 ranks and the ability to take 10. A cliffside or most castle walls aren't too hard, so if the mage flies to the top of his spire, you can either enter his trap-filled corridoor, or you can climb up the outside like a badass. This means that your character drives the story -- task X can only be accomplished by certain characters, and you happen to be one of them, so you accoplish the task and move forward with the tale. You have an ability, and can actively "bring the action." The enemy might have to react to you. If the DM does bring the action to you, he brings it to you knowing full well how likely you are to be able to do it. Your choice isn't in how much you risk, it's in how you build your character from the beginning. That's very character-focused. It's about what capabilities you have. The "attention," for better or worse, in 4e, isn't on what you can do. Take the Trip power for example. Once per encounter, you can try to trip someone. Obviously, you don't magically loose the ability to trip someone after you use the power, nor do your tripping muscles cramp up, nor does your enemy somehow gain a magic five-minute memory that renders all trip attempts ineffeicient. Even though it's a per-encounter power, in-character, you don't somehow "loose" the ability to perform a trip except for one small window in every 5-minute span. It's not about what your character can do. It's about what your character DOES do. You only ACTUALLY trip once per encounter, regardless of how often you're actually able to in-character. The action is where the attention is -- on the fact that you DO it, not on your ability to do it (or lack thereof). It's not a binary system, it's a continuum -- you need both to make an RPG worth playing. 4e seems to be very differently weighted on this scale than 3e was. And, rather than G/N/S, I think this is a stronger difference between the editions (since G/N/S is all but useless). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
4e: the new paradigm
Top