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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Beyond Old and New School - "The Secret That Was Lost"
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="Cyberen" data-source="post: 6229194" data-attributes="member: 69074"><p>Thank you very much, good Balesir !</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Definitely, the "1 minute combat round" what part of what I was alluding to when I was claiming 1e was very transparent concerning FitM, and clearly, it offers a blank slate for narration, while at the same time guaranteeing game system integrity (you can narrate/imagine whatever you want... as long as it doesn't change the rolled outcome). 4E is very ambivalent on this subject, as the combat roll is closer to task resolution, and with the (almost) mandatory use of the battlemat, which doesn't give a lot of room to the so-called Schrödinger crevice in the collective theatre of the mind where the battle takes place.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Clarity, simplicity, and a good dose of player fiat (not being bound too much by the vagaries of the die), I can get behind. What I dislike with the AEDU Powers, besides its dry formatting, is : 1) the way a power is hard coded in the PC repertoire : you are "building" a deck of powers 2) its weird attrition scheme : a CaGI fighter will lure its foes exactly once per fight, no more, no less (unless he choses not to). I have the feeling 4E PCs are 6-tricks ponies (3E and 3D powers), which could seem better than "I attack, again and again", but is in fact more of the same. I am longing for something more organic and open-ended, while relying on a robust resource management system. I find @<em><strong><u><a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=697" target="_blank">mearls</a></u></strong></em> did a good job in this direction, in Iron Heroes, with the various classes building and spending their own token pools for SFX.</p><p></p><p></p><p>You are right, of course. The trick with earlier editions, that is lost with 4E, is that DMs are expected to tinker with the rules to make them suit their needs. Gygax pulled the Cleric out of thin air to suit one of his needs, and so can you do if the proposed cast doesn't match your objectives. In other words, if you want a Warlord in 1E, it's not a big deal to create one. 4E is too complex for this scope of creative freedom, but compensates by offering extended refluffing capabilities.</p><p>I think this is the kind of players empowerment ("The rules are guidelines ! Feel free to invent more !"), shared between both sides of the screen (the rules are a very concrete part of the social contract of the game), that has been lost with the later, cleaner, more integrated versions of the game. I am happy Next seems very hackable by design !</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Cyberen, post: 6229194, member: 69074"] Thank you very much, good Balesir ! Definitely, the "1 minute combat round" what part of what I was alluding to when I was claiming 1e was very transparent concerning FitM, and clearly, it offers a blank slate for narration, while at the same time guaranteeing game system integrity (you can narrate/imagine whatever you want... as long as it doesn't change the rolled outcome). 4E is very ambivalent on this subject, as the combat roll is closer to task resolution, and with the (almost) mandatory use of the battlemat, which doesn't give a lot of room to the so-called Schrödinger crevice in the collective theatre of the mind where the battle takes place. Clarity, simplicity, and a good dose of player fiat (not being bound too much by the vagaries of the die), I can get behind. What I dislike with the AEDU Powers, besides its dry formatting, is : 1) the way a power is hard coded in the PC repertoire : you are "building" a deck of powers 2) its weird attrition scheme : a CaGI fighter will lure its foes exactly once per fight, no more, no less (unless he choses not to). I have the feeling 4E PCs are 6-tricks ponies (3E and 3D powers), which could seem better than "I attack, again and again", but is in fact more of the same. I am longing for something more organic and open-ended, while relying on a robust resource management system. I find @[I][B][U][URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=697"]mearls[/URL][/U][/B][/I] did a good job in this direction, in Iron Heroes, with the various classes building and spending their own token pools for SFX. You are right, of course. The trick with earlier editions, that is lost with 4E, is that DMs are expected to tinker with the rules to make them suit their needs. Gygax pulled the Cleric out of thin air to suit one of his needs, and so can you do if the proposed cast doesn't match your objectives. In other words, if you want a Warlord in 1E, it's not a big deal to create one. 4E is too complex for this scope of creative freedom, but compensates by offering extended refluffing capabilities. I think this is the kind of players empowerment ("The rules are guidelines ! Feel free to invent more !"), shared between both sides of the screen (the rules are a very concrete part of the social contract of the game), that has been lost with the later, cleaner, more integrated versions of the game. I am happy Next seems very hackable by design ! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Beyond Old and New School - "The Secret That Was Lost"
Top