Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7939729" data-attributes="member: 42582">[USER=6779196]@Charlaquin[/USER], writing my second reply to [USER=6787503]@Hriston[/USER] as well as my post just upthread reminded me of your comment in one of the other threads about the relative anxiety 4e (cf 5e) caused you as a GM.I think some of this is the fault (to use that dreaded word!) of the 4e DMG, which could (I think) do a better job of explaining the tolerances of the system, the devices open to GMs, etc.But I think this might also be related to a particular (broadly Gamist, in the Forge sense) approach to the point of the encounter in 4e play. If the gamist goal is to be achieved, by the players, by overcoming the GM's challenge fair and square, just as the rules provide for, then I can see how the anxiety (I hope that's something like the right word) that you described could arise. And I personally don't think this is the best way to approach 4e.I think gamist 4e is better approached more &quot;lightly&quot; - so that it's more about showing off, through clever moves etc, then about the ultimate fairness of and victory over encounters. I think that takes quite a bit of pressure off the GM, and allows her/him to run encounters a bit more fluidly and openly and even frivolously.My own 4e play had a bit of the above and also fairly light narrativism (in the Forge sense), and again that allows for a more relaxed GMing approach which still allows the players to make their points about character, theme etc.The best 4e book, in my view, for getting at (or at least pointing towards) some of this stuff is actually the Worlds and Monsters preview. I think it's a pity that more of that wasn't further developed and then incorporated into the DMG.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7939729, member: 42582"] [USER=6779196]@Charlaquin[/USER], writing my second reply to [USER=6787503]@Hriston[/USER] as well as my post just upthread reminded me of your comment in one of the other threads about the relative anxiety 4e (cf 5e) caused you as a GM. I think some of this is the fault (to use that dreaded word!) of the 4e DMG, which could (I think) do a better job of explaining the tolerances of the system, the devices open to GMs, etc. But I think this might also be related to a particular (broadly Gamist, in the Forge sense) approach to the [I]point [/I]of the encounter in 4e play. If the gamist goal is to be achieved, by the players, by overcoming the GM's challenge [I]fair and square[/I], just as the rules provide for, then I can see how the anxiety (I hope that's something like the right word) that you described could arise. And I personally don't think this is the best way to approach 4e. I think gamist 4e is better approached more "lightly" - so that it's more about showing off, through clever moves etc, then about the ultimate fairness of and victory over encounters. I think that takes quite a bit of pressure off the GM, and allows her/him to run encounters a bit more fluidly and openly and even frivolously. My own 4e play had a bit of the above and also fairly light narrativism (in the Forge sense), and again that allows for a more relaxed GMing approach which still allows the players to make their points about character, theme etc. The best 4e book, in my view, for getting at (or at least pointing towards) some of this stuff is actually the Worlds and Monsters preview. I think it's a pity that more of that wasn't further developed and then incorporated into the DMG. [/QUOTE]

Verification