Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pawsplay" data-source="post: 5459494" data-attributes="member: 15538">I stand corrected on the quotation. I hope the larger point was not lost? Even before 4e was in print, design descisions were made that negatively impacted my interest.I didn't accuse your game of being shallow.It is a clear extension of the "it only needs stats if you're going to kill it" mentality that does, indeed, affect thematics. We are talking about thematic breadth rather than depth, though. 4e has adequate depth in a number of areas, such as character developments (the Paragon Paths being a good example) and complex encounters (skill challenges, dynamic battlefields). Depth in the economics is, in my opinion, significantly shallower than in 3e, beginning with the nonsensical rules for reselling magic items by PCs. But that is a secondary activity to first attaining those items. The lack of thematic breadth, however, is quite evident: little support for holdings and rulership, non-combat interactions, traipsing through fairy rings, mules, etc. As an analogy, 4e is like a big Hollywood movie that goes from one action scene to another, interspersed with some colorful dialog and some melodrama. I agree. Was there something in this paragraph that was supposed to contradict what I've said before, or is this mostly continuity for the sake of what you are going to say next?Whoa, there. Re-read. I was observing specifically that both 4e and 3e contain within them a functional dungeon-bashing game, usually taken as a sub-game of the larger experience. My point was that 4e and 3e differ in important details apart from the common set of components, while being similar within that realm.4e tends to aim for the smooth montage, the expository transition, the leitmotif. 3e offers a wider set of tools for more diverse genres of experience. In the case of some players, that diversity may be unwanted. But in the case of 4e, the lack of that diversity is irreplaceable to those who want it. I'm not saying 3e is better, holistically and objectively, than 4e, any more than I would say filet minon is better than a cheeseburger. But proceeding from the goals of an RPG, as I understand them for myself and for others generally, I perceive 3e to be a better designed game, just as I perceive a well-prepared filet minon to be better than a cheeseburger made from standard chuck. Now, if you really want an cheeseburger, it doesn't matter how good the steak is. 4e does not provide a gourmet experience. It's fine to like it, but it just doesn't. Now, somewhere at out there, even as we speak, someone is making a cheeseburger from top grade sirloin, aged cheddar and gourmet jack cheeses, and a very fine yeasty bun, and good for them. That's about as far as I want to with that metaphor. Also, I'm getting hungry.4e is facile. That is neither praise nor condemnation; that is what it is. 3e is baroque. It was be nice if all the unfun things were easy and all the fun things were deliciously engaging, but there is going to be tension between design goals, aside from different preferences between gamers.Coming back around, there is nothing in 3e or 4e that is likely to significantly prevent you from playing out detailed scenarios with depth of world and character. However, what 4e offers is barely more than no system at all in such matters. Since I find 4e to be a mechanical monsters in the areas it covers fluently, that's no sale from me. Say what you will about 3e, you can buy a mule. NPC abilities could be interpreted as intelligently as can PC abilities, having the same "keywords." PC and NPC versions of the same race can use the same equipment. NPC merchants aren't insane monopolists who think they can force the world's greatest adventurers to sell them magic items for 1/5 of retail even though the items are usually sold used in the first place, and are actually likely to accept a favorable swap on similarly priced items. If you don't miss that, no problem. 4e will make your life easy. Pay attention to what you think is fun. But I think it's clear, going back to the OT, that many if not most D&D players want a little more there, there. That's one reason 4e has not sold as well. Monsters don't have ecologies, merchants don't have comprehensible motivations, and some PCs don't seem to physically belong to their own race.</blockquote>

Verification