Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Older Editions
Anyone playing 4e at the moment?
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="Lyxen" data-source="post: 8390972" data-attributes="member: 7032025"><p>It might be useful, or it might be cumbersome and unneeded.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This does not take into account the quality of the successes and failures, the drama and the story, and the way the players react and participate to it. So either you make the count visible and I can guarantee that the players will just try to use skills to increase the count of successes, or you hide it, and in that case it really serves no purpose except to constrain the DM into declaring an overall failure or success when the count reaches a pre-determined value.</p><p></p><p>As a DM, I don't want the players to hunt successes and skill rolls, and I value the story and my players reaction to it more than counting things arbitrarily because when I created the scenario I certainly did not envision all the ways to succeed and fail. So why bind myself arbitrarily to these?</p><p></p><p>Again, it's a question of playing style mostly, I'm not denigrating another way of playing, just explaining the one that we prefer. And it's linked to preparation, for example I usually don't try and find the ways by which the PCs might succeed. I present a situation, just trying to make it so that it does not look impossible to get out of, and then I go with the flow and the PCs ideas.</p><p></p><p>This avoid any sort of railroading towards pre-determined solutions - and again I'm not accusing anyone of railroading or saying that a bit is bad or not, just the fact that listing the solutions and where the PCs get points is already creating some structure that will guide the results.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, please consider the fact that 5e, which does not have these formal structures, has been what, ten times more successful than 4e ever was in introducing new players to the hobby.</p><p></p><p>For me, it's because it's easy to play overall, and does not have much formalism or actually even a jargon and technical vocabulary.</p><p></p><p>So for me, there are better ways to support new players.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>See above.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It was just a tangent, to say that although it can help some people, formalising things (skill challenges, grid) has a cost in terms of ease of use of the system, that's all.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lyxen, post: 8390972, member: 7032025"] It might be useful, or it might be cumbersome and unneeded. This does not take into account the quality of the successes and failures, the drama and the story, and the way the players react and participate to it. So either you make the count visible and I can guarantee that the players will just try to use skills to increase the count of successes, or you hide it, and in that case it really serves no purpose except to constrain the DM into declaring an overall failure or success when the count reaches a pre-determined value. As a DM, I don't want the players to hunt successes and skill rolls, and I value the story and my players reaction to it more than counting things arbitrarily because when I created the scenario I certainly did not envision all the ways to succeed and fail. So why bind myself arbitrarily to these? Again, it's a question of playing style mostly, I'm not denigrating another way of playing, just explaining the one that we prefer. And it's linked to preparation, for example I usually don't try and find the ways by which the PCs might succeed. I present a situation, just trying to make it so that it does not look impossible to get out of, and then I go with the flow and the PCs ideas. This avoid any sort of railroading towards pre-determined solutions - and again I'm not accusing anyone of railroading or saying that a bit is bad or not, just the fact that listing the solutions and where the PCs get points is already creating some structure that will guide the results. Well, please consider the fact that 5e, which does not have these formal structures, has been what, ten times more successful than 4e ever was in introducing new players to the hobby. For me, it's because it's easy to play overall, and does not have much formalism or actually even a jargon and technical vocabulary. So for me, there are better ways to support new players. See above. It was just a tangent, to say that although it can help some people, formalising things (skill challenges, grid) has a cost in terms of ease of use of the system, that's all. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Older Editions
Anyone playing 4e at the moment?
Top