Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5662864" data-attributes="member: 42582">This seems to presuppose that combat and roleplaying are at odds. There are a number of RPGs whose design is grounded in a denial of this presupposition - at least Burning Wheel, The Riddle of Steel, and 4e.If the orientation of a game is that roleplaying, in that game, should be focused on combat; and, if a game treats combat as one of the most important sites of conflict; then the character and quality of its combat rules will make a signficant contribution to the games support of roleplaying. (Of course, how mechanical balance would factor into this is a further matter. But it's probably not going to be unimportant.)The 15 minute adventuring day is not just about combat. As VB and others have indicated, it's also about the mid-to-high level wizard's dominance of non-combat (via Rope Trick, teleportation, etc).A system which gives the wizard less of that sort of control is, I think, less likely to see the 15 minute adventuring day. This is probably extraneous to the general point under discussion, but I don't understand how or why enemies can't be tricked in 4e. Do you have any particular design in mind? Eg you could remove the wizard's ability to nova; or you could remove the wizard's control over the non-combat environment. Either would go some way to removing the systemic underpinnings of the 15-minute day (4e opts for both). Either is likely to be controversial in some quarters. But keeping (or reintroducing) either feature is also likely to be controversial (personally, for example, I have no real interest in going back to a game in which PCs can nova, both for balance reasons but more importantly for aesthetic reasons).</blockquote>

Verification