Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Thomas Shey" data-source="post: 8616260" data-attributes="member: 7026617">Though I think that I'd argue that 4e is still far, far more interested in supporting gamist interests than simulationist ones; too many of its powers are interesting from a tactical POV, but don't seem to really match up with their fluff all that well (as shown by the frequent suggestions to reskin them for other purposes).&nbsp; Probably its strongest simulationist element is simply the fact it actually puts a priority on positioning.Yeah.&nbsp; Their primary strength is they do provide a fairly measured pace-of-resolution structure, which I expect is a strong virtue to many people.&nbsp; Its not the only way to do that, but most of the others are overtly metagame in structure (i.e. expended metacurrency, which can do the same thing while leaving the basic wounding process alone) which some people don't like, and they are slightly more complicated.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Thomas Shey, post: 8616260, member: 7026617"] Though I think that I'd argue that 4e is still far, far more interested in supporting gamist interests than simulationist ones; too many of its powers are interesting from a tactical POV, but don't seem to really match up with their fluff all that well (as shown by the frequent suggestions to reskin them for other purposes). Probably its strongest simulationist element is simply the fact it actually puts a priority on positioning. Yeah. Their primary strength is they do provide a fairly measured pace-of-resolution structure, which I expect is a strong virtue to many people. Its not the only way to do that, but most of the others are overtly metagame in structure (i.e. expended metacurrency, which can do the same thing while leaving the basic wounding process alone) which some people don't like, and they are slightly more complicated. [/QUOTE]

Verification