Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="KidSnide" data-source="post: 4108508" data-attributes="member: 54710">I agree that rules mechanics are not the physics of the world, nor do I think that characters have exact knowledge of how they work.&nbsp; And, I like rules (like action points) which allow players to influence the narrative of the story.&nbsp; I am also, incidentally, extremely excited about 4e, because I write the story and the world and mostly want rules mechanics out of WotC that make a fun combat sub-game.But, I also have to agree that the powers need an in-game rationalization.&nbsp; In the story, a power is something the /character/ does.&nbsp; I don't mind the gamist per-day limitation.&nbsp; Why doesn't he do it again?&nbsp; No opening, I guess.&nbsp; Maybe too tired.&nbsp; But I need to know what the character is doing, and that needs to be closely related to the effect.&nbsp; Otherwise, you get these weird effects like &quot;I must heal my friend, so I guess I'll hit this guy...&quot;I'm not sure I can point to any one power that is impossible to justify in the majority of circumstances.&nbsp; Sure, it's a little harder to explain how you are limiting the movements of the fiendish housefly warlock.&nbsp; But, frankly, any story with a fiendish housefly warlock is already well into the narrative-of-the-weird, so stranger explanations may be necessary for a number of things.&nbsp; My concern is the cumulative effect of many powers that are a challenge to explain.&nbsp; It just seems like there will be a lot fights that stop so the table can figure out what exactly is happening in the game world.&nbsp; My guess is that some tables won't care, and other tables will get good at figuring out how to turn 4e combat into a coherent narrative.&nbsp; (Maybe those later tables will avoid certain powers?)&nbsp; But, in the short term, seems like many of us are going spend more time going &quot;huh?!?&quot;, which is hardly desirable.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="KidSnide, post: 4108508, member: 54710"] I agree that rules mechanics are not the physics of the world, nor do I think that characters have exact knowledge of how they work. And, I like rules (like action points) which allow players to influence the narrative of the story. I am also, incidentally, extremely excited about 4e, because I write the story and the world and mostly want rules mechanics out of WotC that make a fun combat sub-game. But, I also have to agree that the powers need an in-game rationalization. In the story, a power is something the /character/ does. I don't mind the gamist per-day limitation. Why doesn't he do it again? No opening, I guess. Maybe too tired. But I need to know what the character is doing, and that needs to be closely related to the effect. Otherwise, you get these weird effects like "I must heal my friend, so I guess I'll hit this guy..." I'm not sure I can point to any one power that is impossible to justify in the majority of circumstances. Sure, it's a little harder to explain how you are limiting the movements of the fiendish housefly warlock. But, frankly, any story with a fiendish housefly warlock is already well into the narrative-of-the-weird, so stranger explanations may be necessary for a number of things. My concern is the cumulative effect of many powers that are a challenge to explain. It just seems like there will be a lot fights that stop so the table can figure out what exactly is happening in the game world. My guess is that some tables won't care, and other tables will get good at figuring out how to turn 4e combat into a coherent narrative. (Maybe those later tables will avoid certain powers?) But, in the short term, seems like many of us are going spend more time going "huh?!?", which is hardly desirable. [/QUOTE]

Verification