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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Primal" data-source="post: 4111006" data-attributes="member: 30678">Character immersion. IMO D&D combat system distracts from it heavily, apparently even more so in 4E. Not only that, but a lot of these 4E mechanics actually make it harder to create that story. For example, the abilities and certain other mechanics (e.g. the natural 20  on your "recovery" roll) which are pretty hard to describe in a logical fashion. Metagaming, in the sense that you'd employ out-of-character information to benefit the PCs in battle, does not have anything to do with that in D&D, since it's usually discouraged by virtually every DM.Maybe the fact that D&D has always strived to model both high fantasy and low fantasy in its "pseudo-sim" way, and somehow I just can't see how you'd treat combat just as a mechanical abstraction from it. Although 4E may be stepping away from sim, IMO D&D has to some extent (and not succeeded very well, I admit) tried to mechanically model the gameworld in its fashion. I think 4E would have succeeded better as a trait-based system if the design goal was to constitute resolution mechanics that are not even meant to simulate the gameworld (and IMO it would have worked better as a "mechanical abstraction" as well).  I have no problem believing in warriors spurred on by effective leaders, but the trouble is that I feel the end result in 4E is really boardgame-y and I don't see it encouraging neither storytelling or character immersion. IMO Agon models heroic fantasy in a better way while encouraging storytelling (and metagaming, too, but in Agon it happens almost on a subconscious level and actually has an impact on the story).</blockquote>

Verification