NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercurius" data-source="post: 6230414" data-attributes="member: 59082">Hmm. Pemerton, I told you that I haven't played pre-3e for almost two decades and 3e in like a decade, so I'm a bit rusty on the specifics. But I did tell you that the battle captain can be accomplished in any iteration of D&D, if - and it is a big if - you see the rules as guidelines rather than Absolute Laws That Must Not Be Broken.Reading the rest of your response, and from your previous replies, I take it that you're a RAW guy. I think this goes back to [MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION]'s mention of cognitive styles. Some like to use the RAW and optimize them as much as possible without "breaking" them, while others see them as guidelines, touch-stones that give form and structure to the game narrative. Check out KAI Theory which posits two extremes on a spectrum, Adaptive and Innovative. Adaptors prefer to work within the system, to master it even, to do better and better, while Innovators like to work outside the system, to do things differently. In that sense, you could say that there's an Adaptive and an Innovative style to approach D&D - and neither is inherently superior to the other, although both have their strengths (and weaknesses).The battle captain can be resolved in any number of ways. As I already said, you figure out target numbers and relevant modifiers for what the player wants to do and then you role for it. The tricky part is the second aspect - allowing your allies to charge without costing them an action. Here I'd say flexibility is required; as I said, if a player can come up with an idea they should be given a shot. I think what you're pointing at here is that 4e combat is more detailed, more granular (if I'm using the term correctly), than other forms of D&D. It isn't as much that you can do things in 4e that you can't do in other editions, its that 4e is more detailed - it gives actual rules for it, rather than guidelines.Its like a microscope - if you look at a needle with the naked eye it looks smooth and sharp, but if you look at it under a high-powered microscope, the rough edges start showing. 4e allows for a more "scoped in" combat - with greater detail, which in turn requires more specific rules. The problem I have with it, though, is that - like 3e, but in a different way - it puts too much emphasis on system mastery. That's fine for some, but not others. This is one of the (few) major reasons 4e lost a lot of folks, in my opinion.Yes, and I introduced a fate point system for my 4e game which gave players an undefined ("non-earmarked") resource pool that they could apply to rolls for self-generated dramatic effects. I don't have a problem with that, but the problem is the pre-determined "drop-down menu" approach that AEDU takes which ends up obfuscating more open-ended theater of mind actions.You keep on twisting what I'm saying, pemerton, and seemingly missing a lot of what I actually am saying. I am not saying "roll vs. target number should be the only mechanism for allocating effects to non-casters." I just don't like "AEDU-only." This is why I introduced the "fate pool" which allowed players to allocate resources in the form of modifiers to a dramatic action.Those are two separate issues, both of which you've brought up. The backstory bit was an example of how a player doesn't (at least in my approach) have full authority over their character's backstory - in a similar sense to how you and I don't have full authority over our own biographies. We might think we know our own personal histories but might not realize what was going on "behind the scenes" or certain underlying factors, or simply not remember things correctly.But the Christmas tree analogy was specifically about AEDU and 4e's approach in general. As I said, you have two extremes:1) Don't ask for anything at all and be surprised by what you get (or don't get)2) Ask for specific items and specific items only, and/or buy your own presentsIt isn't black or white and few games take one or the other approach but are somewhere along the spectrum. But the point is that the first extreme has a lot of freedom, but also more room for "error" (either buying something someone doesn't want or getting something you don't want), while the second extreme is more fail-proof, but also without the element of surprise and mystery.Let me put it this way: in the AEDU paradigm you begin every combat encounter with a list of things you can do, namely your powers. That list is more expansive, more detailed and granular in terms of rules effect, than any previous edition to D&D - including 3e (although I can't speak for Pathfinder, but I'm fairly certain that's the case)...with the possible exception of spell-casters.When combat begins you begin allocating your resources (powers). I found that there was a basic formula: use your encounter powers first, then, if the opponent was almost defeated, finish them off with at-wills. If they're still going strong and the party is starting to lose, bring out the dailies. It was very strategic, very tactical, and generally quite fun (at least until the Grind began). But there was a certain predictability; each player had their pre-determined list of powers, which had pre-determined effects.In my idea world, 5e would still have something akin to "powers" - or at least maneuvers - for non-spellcasters, but that there would be more emphasis placed on improvisation. Sort of like how the game Ars Magica has both formulaic spells and spontaneous casting. All editions have both, but 4e places the emphasis on the formula in a way unlike any previous edition, and I found that - at least for my tastes - went too far and actually obfuscated spontaneity and improvisation.Let me put it one more way. Let's say a PC wants to sprint around the opponent, climb and jump off a boulder, and attack the opponent from behind and above. This action can occur in any form of D&D. But in 4e, the default approach is to look at the list of powers and try to meld the two. Actually, I found that more often then not, players wouldn't even think about their own actions; they would look at their list of powers and pick one to use.Now we've ranged far from the original topic, which I'm fine with, but I will relate this back to imagination and immersion. In 4e, let's say a ranger PC is fighting a group of orcs. He looks at his list of powers and says "I'll use Split the Tree." For me this approach detracts from immersion and imagination. One or two of my players found their way around this, at least when they described what they were doing - they came up with a narrative inspired by the power, and then said "using X power."I prefer taking the approach of the player imagining themselves as the character (the ranger) and then deciding what to do based upon the mindspace. "I draw two arrows and fire them at the two orcs in front of me." If there's a power that applies, fine, but it is back to the cart-and-horse thing.I should re-emphasize that I am not telling you which way is best for you. That would not only be arrogant but outright foolish. What I am saying beyond "what is best for me," is trying to understand what is best for most - what works as a default to the D&D game that will bring as much enjoyment to as many as possible, and especially with regards to inspiring imagination. In that regard, I think 4e missed the mark.That said, I really hope that 5e has a "tactical combat module" that does something similar to 4e with specific resources ala powers. Even better would be if some players could play 4e-style characters at the same table as 3e-style and AD&D-style. That was the initial intention of Mearls & Co, but I don't know if they've backed off. In other words, the absolute best case scenario is not X or Y, but both - as fits the campaign, DM, and players. I just don't think that 4e offered both, or at least the other side of the spectrum was obfuscated by AEDU.Now I've got to re-join the family for house-cleaning! I need to re-allocate my resources <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification