Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="moxcamel" data-source="post: 5440047" data-attributes="member: 67954">Reading through the responses, I didn't get this impression at all.It seems to me that you are trying to find a reason to like a game that you don't particularly like.&nbsp; To wit--What I'm reading is that you've given 4e a fair shake, and it's not doing it for you.You remind me of my own experience with GURPS.&nbsp; I *love* the idea behind it.&nbsp; I love the source books.&nbsp; I love the mechanics.&nbsp; But I just really don't like to play it, and I really can't tell you exactly why.&nbsp; I've tried it many times, I've both GM'd it and played it, and I just can't get into it.&nbsp; 4e might be your GURPS.&nbsp; There's nothing wrong with that, and hey at least you've been open-minded enough to give it more than a fair shot.&nbsp; If you like the previous editions, stick with your favorite.&nbsp; Contrary to popular belief, the old editions may be out of print but they aren't dead.&nbsp; And if you liked 3.5, you might want to give Pathfinder a shot--I'm a big fan and I think they've done the 3.x line a lot of justice.It really depends on the skill challenge, but for the most part you should be integrating them into your role-playing.&nbsp; And the amount of role-playing you do is going to depend on your players.&nbsp; I've played in groups where everyone was in-character all the time, and I've been in groups where the height of role-playing consisted of &quot;I try to convince the baron that he should hire us.&quot;&nbsp; Whatever your group's take on role-playing is, you need to take it into account in the skill challenge.&nbsp; It's really no different than back in 1e days when a player would tell you she was looking for secret doors or trying to pass some monsters undetected.&nbsp; Skill challenges just formalize it a bit more mechanically.&nbsp; Nothing about the RPG aspect of the game has changed.In fact, tangential to your concerns, I've read a lot of posts that pretty much boil down to &quot;4e has made the game too mechanical.&quot;&nbsp; And while yeah, 4e is probably the &quot;crunchiest&quot; of the editions, I just don't get how that's meant to dampen role-playing opportunities.&nbsp; Certainly the level and quality of role-playing in my games hasn't been effected by 4e.&nbsp; Don't let a new mechanic like skill challenges fool you into thinking that it replaces role-playing.&nbsp; Every aspect of your game--whatever system you play--should be driven by the RPG aspect.&nbsp; If you let the mechanics drive your game then you might as well just go out and get yourself an MMO subscription, because at least then you don't have to bother with all the dice rolling. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />[MENTION=11239]Gort[/MENTION]: I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth, but I think the OP is using brevity in his thread title, not arrogance.&nbsp; His post was thoughtful and detailed.&nbsp; It's obvious that he's looking for answers rather than trying to poke his fingers in anyone's eyes.&nbsp; IMHO anyway.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="moxcamel, post: 5440047, member: 67954"] Reading through the responses, I didn't get this impression at all. It seems to me that you are trying to find a reason to like a game that you don't particularly like. To wit-- What I'm reading is that you've given 4e a fair shake, and it's not doing it for you. You remind me of my own experience with GURPS. I *love* the idea behind it. I love the source books. I love the mechanics. But I just really don't like to play it, and I really can't tell you exactly why. I've tried it many times, I've both GM'd it and played it, and I just can't get into it. 4e might be your GURPS. There's nothing wrong with that, and hey at least you've been open-minded enough to give it more than a fair shot. If you like the previous editions, stick with your favorite. Contrary to popular belief, the old editions may be out of print but they aren't dead. And if you liked 3.5, you might want to give Pathfinder a shot--I'm a big fan and I think they've done the 3.x line a lot of justice. It really depends on the skill challenge, but for the most part you should be integrating them into your role-playing. And the amount of role-playing you do is going to depend on your players. I've played in groups where everyone was in-character all the time, and I've been in groups where the height of role-playing consisted of "I try to convince the baron that he should hire us." Whatever your group's take on role-playing is, you need to take it into account in the skill challenge. It's really no different than back in 1e days when a player would tell you she was looking for secret doors or trying to pass some monsters undetected. Skill challenges just formalize it a bit more mechanically. Nothing about the RPG aspect of the game has changed. In fact, tangential to your concerns, I've read a lot of posts that pretty much boil down to "4e has made the game too mechanical." And while yeah, 4e is probably the "crunchiest" of the editions, I just don't get how that's meant to dampen role-playing opportunities. Certainly the level and quality of role-playing in my games hasn't been effected by 4e. Don't let a new mechanic like skill challenges fool you into thinking that it replaces role-playing. Every aspect of your game--whatever system you play--should be driven by the RPG aspect. If you let the mechanics drive your game then you might as well just go out and get yourself an MMO subscription, because at least then you don't have to bother with all the dice rolling. :) [MENTION=11239]Gort[/MENTION]: I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth, but I think the OP is using brevity in his thread title, not arrogance. His post was thoughtful and detailed. It's obvious that he's looking for answers rather than trying to poke his fingers in anyone's eyes. IMHO anyway. [/QUOTE]

Verification