Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="nnms" data-source="post: 5777751" data-attributes="member: 83293">Sim guys are often also playability guys.&nbsp; I've played and ran a game that broke things down into .6 second phases.&nbsp; That's not going to happen again.People do what at least a reasonable amount of verisimilitude.&nbsp; And pretty much every RPG.&nbsp; 4E has it.&nbsp; It produces play in keeping with heroic fantasy.&nbsp; It works at what it does.It needs some reforming and adjusting to work for other things people want to simulate though.&nbsp; And then there are a few things it gets in the way of in terms of verisimilitude.The notion that because we can't perfectly simulate something means that we shouldn't even bother having any elements of it is what I take issue with.&nbsp; Like declaring all attempts at it a crock.&nbsp; Or that if someone has a negative experience of a set of rules, it can't possibly be the rules but must be their failing.&nbsp; That's all pure crap.For the majority of D&amp;D's history it's been a traditional RPG where you describe what's going on and what the characters are doing and then use the system to resolve things it concerns itself with.Even if 4E moved away from this approach and turned parts of it into set game procedures, it didn't abandon it completely.&nbsp; People still have expectations of the type of play it produces.When it first came out, I used to hold up 4E as a champion of &quot;finally leaving all that simulation stuff behind.&quot;&nbsp; Turns out I was wrong.&nbsp; It left a lot behind, but it still has some.&nbsp; And one example are the specific defender mechanics.It is a matter of verisimilitude that a fighter can actually block a monster from getting by him and attacking his friends.&nbsp; It's a plausible part of heroic fantasy fiction that one character might put himself in the way of danger to keep it from getting to others.&nbsp; A fighter's 4E combat challenge &amp; superiority are simulation in nature.Those mechanics can still exist without being attached to the larger structures of encounter based time mechanics, powers, defined combat roles, and other things people looking for verisimilitude sometimes find too gamey.As an aside, I think a defender mechanic should be a universal move/mode/stance available to everyone.&nbsp; Sure, someone practiced and dedicated to it should be way, way better at it, but I think everyone should be able to specifically stand in the way of something and try to stay between it and someone else.&nbsp; They might get bowled over and knocked on their ass, but they should at least be able to try.&nbsp; I think it's a plausible part of heroic fantasy for someone who is less than qualified to still put themselves in harms way to protect someone else.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="nnms, post: 5777751, member: 83293"] Sim guys are often also playability guys. I've played and ran a game that broke things down into .6 second phases. That's not going to happen again. People do what at least a reasonable amount of verisimilitude. And pretty much every RPG. 4E has it. It produces play in keeping with heroic fantasy. It works at what it does. It needs some reforming and adjusting to work for other things people want to simulate though. And then there are a few things it gets in the way of in terms of verisimilitude. The notion that because we can't perfectly simulate something means that we shouldn't even bother having any elements of it is what I take issue with. Like declaring all attempts at it a crock. Or that if someone has a negative experience of a set of rules, it can't possibly be the rules but must be their failing. That's all pure crap. For the majority of D&D's history it's been a traditional RPG where you describe what's going on and what the characters are doing and then use the system to resolve things it concerns itself with. Even if 4E moved away from this approach and turned parts of it into set game procedures, it didn't abandon it completely. People still have expectations of the type of play it produces. When it first came out, I used to hold up 4E as a champion of "finally leaving all that simulation stuff behind." Turns out I was wrong. It left a lot behind, but it still has some. And one example are the specific defender mechanics. It is a matter of verisimilitude that a fighter can actually block a monster from getting by him and attacking his friends. It's a plausible part of heroic fantasy fiction that one character might put himself in the way of danger to keep it from getting to others. A fighter's 4E combat challenge & superiority are simulation in nature. Those mechanics can still exist without being attached to the larger structures of encounter based time mechanics, powers, defined combat roles, and other things people looking for verisimilitude sometimes find too gamey. As an aside, I think a defender mechanic should be a universal move/mode/stance available to everyone. Sure, someone practiced and dedicated to it should be way, way better at it, but I think everyone should be able to specifically stand in the way of something and try to stay between it and someone else. They might get bowled over and knocked on their ass, but they should at least be able to try. I think it's a plausible part of heroic fantasy for someone who is less than qualified to still put themselves in harms way to protect someone else. [/QUOTE]

Verification