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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ratskinner" data-source="post: 6009533" data-attributes="member: 6688937">For me, 4e made up for the Cosmology stuff by making monster creation/design so easy that I could re-work whatever I wanted in minutes, rather than hours. For other DMs...well, I guess not. ::shrug::I think I misspoke a bit so let me (I think) clear something up. (Sorry about the time you must have spent writing all that.)In my head, I make a distinction between Narrativist play and Narrativist rules/systems. So, for instance, for play to be N, it doesn't necessarily need a strong N resolution system, for rules to be N, they do. (If that makes sense.)  Admittedly, I deviate from the standard model in my feeling about N vs. G or S, which I'm sure doesn't help matters.An N game (or mechanics within a game) doesn't have to be rules-light, but it also doesn't have any particular need to be rules-heavy.  For N play, yes. For me to call it an N game, no. My current group has plenty of N play around Dwarf Racial Superiority/Insecurity, but the game we're playing isn't N.  "gorge" isn't ringing any bells, so I'd guess not.I think we just disagree here. Other than codifying the number of successes/failures the DM may require, I don't see anything particularly magical about Skill Challenges vs. cumulative in-game causation. Maybe that's because DMs like myself were running things in a much more "off the book" conflict-resolution style prior to 4e, or maybe not. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/erm.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":erm:" title="Erm    :erm:" data-shortname=":erm:" /> I've been told I was running Conflict-resolution Fudge prior to even knowing what "Conflict Resolution" was. ::shrug:: I'm also fairly critical/skeptical of mechanics in general, when it comes to this kind of thing.</blockquote>

Verification